Skip to main content
Glama

lawmadi-os

by io.github.peter120525-cmd
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

ask_expert

[KEY REQUIRED · 3 credits · PRO plan only] 전문가 모드 법률 분석 — 전체 검증 파이프라인을 돌려 더 깊이 인용된 답변을 만듭니다. ask보다 느립니다. Pro 요금제 전용입니다(Pro 크레딧 팩 구매 시 활성화). 잔액만으로는 열리지 않으며, Pro가 아니면 2크레딧을 차감하지 않고 거절합니다 — 그 경우 ask(1크레딧)를 쓰세요. / Expert mode legal analysis — runs the full verification pipeline for a more detailed, deeply-cited answer. Slower than ask. Pro plan only (unlocked by buying the Pro credit pack); a positive balance alone is not enough. Non-Pro callers are refused without being charged — use ask (1 credit) instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
langNoResponse language. Auto-detected if omitted.
queryYesLegal question in Korean or English (max 2000 chars).
client_tagNo선택. client_tag: 호출자 식별용, **응답에 영향 없음**(8~64자, 영숫자·_-.). 서버 로그에만 남아 호출을 골라 세는 데 씁니다. 형식이 어긋나면 무시합니다 — 거절하지 않습니다. 질의 본문에 섞지 마세요: 본문에 넣으면 질문의 일부가 되어 분류와 검증 결과가 달라집니다. / Optional caller label (8-64 chars). Logged only; never affects the response. Invalid values are ignored, not rejected. Do not put it in the query text — there it becomes part of the question.
idempotency_keyNo선택. 재시도 안전 키(8~64자, 영숫자·_-.). 같은 키로 다시 부르면 **두 번 과금되지 않고** 보관된 답변을 그대로 돌려줍니다(24시간). 전문가 답변은 2크레딧이라 타임아웃 시 이 키가 특히 중요합니다. / Optional retry-safe key (8-64 chars). Retrying with the same key is never charged twice and replays the stored answer for 24h.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / client_tag
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "선택. client_tag: 호출자 식별용, **응답에 영향 없음**(8~64자, 영숫자·_-.). 서버 로그에만 남아 호출을 골라 세는 데 씁니다. 형식이 어긋나면 무시합니다 — 거절하지 않습니다. 질의 본문에 섞지 마세요: 본문에 넣으면 질문의 일부가 되어 분류와 검증 결과가 달라집니다. / Optional caller label (8-64 chars). Logged only; never affects the response. Invalid values are ignored, not rejected. Do not put it in the query text — there it becomes part of the question.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / idempotency_key
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "선택. 재시도 안전 키(8~64자, 영숫자·_-.). 같은 키로 다시 부르면 **두 번 과금되지 않고** 보관된 답변을 그대로 돌려줍니다(24시간). 전문가 답변은 2크레딧이라 타임아웃 시 이 키가 특히 중요합니다. / Optional retry-safe key (8-64 chars). Retrying with the same key is never charged twice and replays the stored answer for 24h.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses key behaviors: requires a Pro plan, a balance alone is insufficient, non-Pro callers are not charged, it is slower, and it runs a full verification pipeline. However, the credit cost is internally inconsistent (header says '3 credits' but text says non-Pro not charged '2 credits'), creating ambiguity about actual pricing.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is front-loaded with the most critical constraints (key, credits, Pro-only) and is logically structured. However, it duplicates the same content in Korean and English, making it longer than strictly necessary; each pair of sentences conveys identical info.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description covers purpose, cost, plan restrictions, refusal behavior, speed, and the alternative, which is substantial for a tool with no annotations and no output schema. The credit ambiguity and lack of any info about response format or potential errors are minor gaps given the otherwise dense context.

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% for all 4 parameters, so the schema already documents them. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, hitting the baseline for full coverage.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'runs the full verification pipeline' for 'legal analysis' to produce 'a more detailed, deeply-cited answer.' It explicitly contrasts with `ask` ('Slower than ask'), making the tool's role distinct from its closest sibling.

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 gives explicit when-to-use (need deeper, verified citations; Pro plan only), when-not-to-use (non-Pro callers are refused), and names the alternative (`ask`, 1 credit). No inference is required to decide between this and `ask`.

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

All lawmadi-os toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources