Skip to main content
Glama

UK Legal Research

by io.github.paulieb89

Search Parliamentary Divisions

votes_search_divisions
Read-onlyIdempotent

USE THIS TOOL WHEN searching Commons or Lords formal votes by topic, date, or member.

Returns division summaries (title, date, vote counts, pass/fail). AFTER calling, pass division_id + house into votes_get_division for the full member-by-member voter lists.

Authoritative source for UK parliamentary vote records.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
houseNoWhich house to search.Commons
limitNoMaximum divisions to return. Default 25 (Commons API max-per-page).
queryNoSearch term for division titles, e.g. 'Rwanda' or 'Online Safety Bill'. Omit to browse recent divisions.
offsetNoNumber of divisions to skip before this page. Default 0. Re-call with offset=offset+returned while has_more is true.
to_dateNoEnd date (YYYY-MM-DD).
from_dateNoStart date (YYYY-MM-DD).
member_idNoFilter to divisions where this member voted. Get the member ID from parliament_find_member.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
houseYesCommons or Lords
limitNoPage size requested
queryNoThe search term, if any (None = browse recent)
totalYesNumber of divisions returned in this call
offsetNoSkip applied to this page
has_moreNoTrue if a full page was returned (more may exist)
divisionsNoMatching divisions. Use the integer `id` field with votes_get_division to fetch the full voter list.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond annotations: the output contains summaries (title, date, vote counts, pass/fail) and that it is the authoritative source for UK parliamentary vote records.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the usage directive. Every sentence adds value: search scope, return summary, downstream handoff, and authoritative source, with no wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 7-parameter tool with a complete schema, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description sufficiently covers when to use it, what it returns, and how to proceed with results. It provides the necessary context for correct selection and invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well-documented. The description reinforces the mapping of 'topic, date, or member' to query/date/member_id, but adds no new parameter-level details beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description explicitly states the tool searches Commons or Lords formal votes by topic, date, or member, and clarifies it returns division summaries. It distinguishes itself from the sibling votes_get_division by noting the downstream call for full voter lists.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It leads with 'USE THIS TOOL WHEN' and specifies the exact search dimensions. It also explicitly instructs the agent to pass division_id and house into votes_get_division afterward, providing clear complementary usage guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All UK Legal Research toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose, with detailed descriptions that prevent ambiguity. Tools covering similar domains (e.g., multiple parliament search tools) are carefully differentiated by their search approach and input requirements.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., bills_get_bill, case_law_search, citations_resolve). Even generic tools adhere to this style. No mixing of conventions.

Tool Count4/5

With 35 tools, the count is on the higher side but appropriate for the wide-ranging domain of UK legal research. Each tool contributes to specific sub-domains (bills, case law, citations, committees, HMRC, legislation, parliament, votes) without unnecessary duplication.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers nearly all essential aspects of UK legal research: searching and retrieving bills, case law, and legislation; parsing and resolving citations; exploring committee evidence; accessing Hansard debates and member interests; and checking HMRC guidance and VAT rates. Gaps like full judgment text retrieval are mitigated by paragraph-level access and indexing.

Resources