TITAN Statutory Gate

check_cbp_drawback_eligibility

Check US CBP duty drawback scope and 5-year lookback readiness (19 USC 1313). Diagnostic gate only; no duty calculations.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "check_cbp_drawback_eligibility"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`provision`	No	Drawback statutory subsection
`query_note`	No	Optional diagnostic note
`import_htsus_8`	No	8-digit HTSUS import code
`days_since_import`	No	Days since CBP import date
`accelerated_payment`	No	Accelerated payment bond flag
`export_schedule_b_8`	No	8-digit Schedule B export code

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description must carry the behavioral burden; it does disclose that the tool performs no duty calculations and acts only as a gate, which prevents misuse as a calculator. It says nothing about permissions, data sources, or what the diagnostic verdict looks like, and the '5-year lookback readiness' concept is never explained as behavior.

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?

Two compact sentences, scope first and the limiting constraint second. No filler, no restatement of the tool name, and the statutory reference is bundled efficiently in parentheses.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a six-parameter diagnostic with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimal but directional: it conveys the domain, the legal basis, and the non-calculation boundary. It leaves the return values entirely unexplained (no output schema to compensate) and does not clarify how the optional parameters affect the eligibility verdict.

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 every parameter including the provision enum and the 8-digit HTSUS/Schedule B codes is already documented structurally. The description adds no interpretation of how the parameters interact — for example, how days_since_import relates to the advertised 5-year lookback test.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb ('Check') and a specific resource ('US CBP duty drawback scope and 5-year lookback readiness'), anchored by the statutory citation 19 USC 1313. The jurisdiction-specific framing (US CBP) implicitly separates it from the EU CBAM, IRS 179D, and UAE QFZP siblings, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

'Diagnostic gate only; no duty calculations' tells the agent this is a pre-qualification step rather than a computation tool, which is genuine usage scoping. However, it never states when to prefer this over the sibling readiness checks, nor what the agent should do after a positive or negative result.

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

All TITAN Statutory Gate tools Inspect

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.