Skip to main content
Glama

Uk Parliament

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Search Members

search_members
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search MPs and Lords by name / party / location / house.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoSearch across name fields
skipNo0-based offset
takeNo1-20 (default 20)
houseNo1 = Commons, 2 = Lords
partyNoParty name
locationNoPostcode or constituency name
is_currentNoOnly currently-sitting members (default true)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
membersNoList of member records matching search criteria
totalResultsNoTotal count of matching members

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false) already convey safety. Description adds searchable field categories but omits that is_current defaults to true and does not detail pagination behavior (skip/take).

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?

Single sentence efficiently conveys purpose. Could be slightly expanded to mention optionality or defaults without losing conciseness.

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?

Output schema covers return values. With 7 optional params and no required ones, description could clarify behavior when no parameters are provided (e.g., returns all?). Still fairly complete given schema richness.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description merely lists field categories without adding meaning beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('MPs and Lords') with filtering dimensions (name/party/location/house). It distinguishes from siblings like get_member and search_bills by resource type.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Description provides basic usage context but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_member for a single member, search_within for other data). No when-not or alternative mentions.

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

All Uk Parliament 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

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools are near-duplicates (ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are currently identical; ai_visibility_check vs scan_competitor_ai_presence overlap), and the massive mix of unrelated domains (Polymarket betting, general data lookup, AI visibility) alongside UK Parliament tools makes selection confusing. An agent would struggle to know whether to use ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, or ask_pipeworx_grounded, or which of the five polymarket tools fits.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools use snake_case with readable names, but the action placement varies (verb_noun like get_bill vs noun_verb like bet_research, entity_profile), and there are compound names like generate_llms_txt and scan_competitor_ai_presence. The style is mostly consistent but the verb_noun pattern is not uniform across the set.

Tool Count2/5

38 tools is heavy, and the overwhelming majority are unrelated to the server's stated UK Parliament purpose. Only 7 tools (get_bill, search_bills, bill_stages, get_member, search_members, search_hansard, recent_divisions) have anything to do with Parliament, making the count wildly inappropriate for the apparent scope.

Completeness2/5

The Parliament-specific surface is thin: basic bill/member/Hansard lookups exist, but there are no tools for specific divisions/votes, committees, publications, or detailed procedural information. The vast non-Parliament tooling is irrelevant, creating a dead end for any real Parliament research beyond the basics.

Resources