Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Louisiana Code

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Louisiana Statute

louisiana_statute
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the FULL TEXT of one section of Louisiana law by citation — Louisiana Revised Statutes ("RS 14:20" justifiable homicide, "La. R.S. 32:414" driver licence suspension), Civil Code articles ("CC 2315" liability for damages), Code of Civil Procedure ("CCP 966" summary judgment), Code of Criminal Procedure ("CCRP 701" speedy trial), Code of Evidence ("CE 404"), Children's Code ("CHC 603") and the Louisiana Constitution ("Const. Art. I, §5"). Returns the heading, statutory text, the section's enactment and amendment history ("Added by Acts 1976, No. 655; Amended by Acts 2014, No. 163") parsed into year/act pairs, and the legislature's own URL. Keyless; sourced live from the Louisiana State Legislature. Use for "what does Louisiana R.S. 14:20 say", "text of La. Civil Code art. 2315", or to check a Louisiana statute a case or contract cites.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "citation": "RS 14:20"
    },
    "name": "louisiana_statute"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
doc_idNoAlternative to citation: the legis.la.gov document id (the d= number) returned by louisiana_law_search or louisiana_title_contents.
citationNoThe citation as written: "RS 14:20", "La. R.S. 9:2800.1", "14:20" (Revised Statutes), "CC 2315" / "La. C.C. art. 2315" (Civil Code), "CCP 966", "CCRP 701", "CE 404", "CHC 603", "Const. Art. I, §5" or "CONST 1:5".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered; the description still adds substantial value beyond that. It discloses exactly what is returned (heading, statutory text, enactment/amendment history parsed into year/act pairs, legislature URL), the data provenance ('sourced live from the Louisiana State Legislature') and the access model ('Keyless').

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?

Front-loaded with the verb and core scope, then layered with citation families, return contents and use cases. It is one dense sentence and the citation example list is long, but nothing is off-topic; a slightly tighter grouping would earn a 5.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description fully compensates by enumerating the return payload (heading, text, parsed history, URL). Combined with the keyless/live-source note and the doc_id fallback path, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret the tool.

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% and both parameters (citation, doc_id) are already documented with examples and accepted citation variants. The description's citation list largely restates those schema examples rather than adding syntax or normalization rules, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ('Get the FULL TEXT of one section of Louisiana law by citation') and scopes it precisely to a single section. The citation examples across RS, CC, CCP, CCRP, CE, CHC and the Constitution make it immediately distinguishable from the sibling search and table-of-contents tools without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete use cases ('what does Louisiana R.S. 14:20 say', 'text of La. Civil Code art. 2315', checking a statute a case or contract cites) and the doc_id parameter notes it is an alternative to citation drawn from louisiana_law_search or louisiana_title_contents. It stops short of an explicit 'use X instead when…' routing rule, which keeps it at 4 rather than 5.

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

All Louisiana Code 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