Skip to main content
Glama

Legislation Uk

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Get Legislation Section

get_legislation_section
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the actual WORDS of one section of a UK Act or statutory instrument — "what does section 5 of the Data Protection Act 2018 say", "quote section 1 of the Human Rights Act", "text of s.170 DPA 2018". Returns the full text of that section alone, so a specific provision does not cost a whole statute. Identify the legislation by type + year + number (Data Protection Act 2018 = ukpga/2018/12) and give the section number. UK law exists in VERSIONS and they differ in substance: pass version to choose "current" (default — the law as amended and in force today), "enacted" (the original text as passed), or a date YYYY-MM-DD for the text as it stood on that day. Every response states which version it served and the date that version took effect. Source: legislation.gov.uk, the official database. Use search_legislation or get_legislation first if you need the year and number.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesDocument type, e.g. "ukpga". One of: ukpga (UK Public General Acts), uksi (UK Statutory Instruments), asp (Scottish Parliament Acts), anaw/asc (Wales), nia (Northern Ireland), ukla (UK Local Acts).
yearYesYear, e.g. 2018.
numberYesItem number within that year/type, e.g. 12 for the Data Protection Act 2018.
sectionYesSection number, e.g. "5", "170", or "5A" for an inserted section.
versionNoWhich version of the text: "current" (default — the law as amended and in force today), "enacted" (the original text as passed), or a date YYYY-MM-DD for the text as it stood on that day.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: version semantics ('current', 'enacted', or date), default behavior, and that every response states the version served and effective date. This goes beyond annotations to describe response behavior.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. It contains 5 sentences, each serving a distinct function: purpose, return scope, identification format, version behavior, and sibling usage. The only minor drawback is slight redundancy with the schema, but overall it is efficient and well-structured.

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?

For a tool with no output schema, the description clearly states the return value ('Returns the full text of that section alone') and the response's version statement. It also covers the critical UK-law versioning nuance and prerequisite lookup steps. Missing edge-case error behavior, but that is not essential for correct 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 coverage is 100% for all 5 parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds a concrete example ('Data Protection Act 2018 = ukpga/2018/12') and re-explains version options, but most parameter meaning is already fully documented in the schema. The description does not significantly reduce ambiguity beyond what the schema provides.

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 opens with 'Read the actual WORDS of one section of a UK Act or statutory instrument', giving a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing 'one section' and 'full text of that section alone', and explicitly differentiates from get_legislation as a prerequisite for retrieving year/number.

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?

Provides clear when-to-use guidance: 'a specific provision does not cost a whole statute' implies cost/scope benefit. It also names alternatives directly: 'Use search_legislation or get_legislation first if you need the year and number.' This is explicit exclusion and alternative selection guidance.

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

All Legislation Uk 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The legislation-specific tools are distinct, but the server bundles dozens of unrelated Pipeworx/prediction-market/AI-visibility tools, making the set's purpose unclear. Several near-identical pairs exist: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are explicitly identical right now, and ai_visibility_check overlaps heavily with scan_competitor_ai_presence. An agent would struggle to know which tool is the right entry point.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming is mixed: snake_case dominates, but camelCase appears in ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, generate_llms_txt, and pipeworx_feedback. There is also inconsistency in verb style — get_/search_/list_ coexist with bare verbs like remember, recall, forget, and subscribe. The legislation tools themselves follow a clean get_legislation* pattern, but the wider set does not.

Tool Count2/5

35 tools is too many for a server named 'Legislation Uk' where only 4 tools actually relate to UK legislation. The remaining 31 tools appear to belong to a broader data/prediction-market platform, which suggests severe scope creep or a mislabeled assembly. This bloats the surface area and makes the server harder for an agent to navigate.

Completeness4/5

For the stated UK-legislation purpose, the core read-and-search workflow is covered: search_legislation, get_legislation, get_legislation_section, and get_legislation_text together support discovery, metadata, targeted section lookup, and full-text retrieval with version selection. Obvious gaps remain, such as full-text content search and amendment/change history, but agents can complete the primary task of finding and reading legislation. The unrelated tools neither help nor complete this domain.

Resources