Skip to main content
Glama

taxonomy_content

Read-only

List TCLP content (clauses, guides) or legal resources filtered by taxonomy facet=value.

Multi-facet filters are combined with AND. Call `taxonomy_facets` first
to learn which facet names and slugs exist; using a name not in that
list returns a 400.

Args:
    filters: Mapping of facet name to value slug, e.g.
             `{"sector": "real-estate", "practice_area": "commercial"}`.
             Each facet may appear at most once.
    scope: `clause` (ClauseName only), `guide` (Guide only), `legal_resource`
           (laws, regulations, standards and frameworks; facets `jurisdiction`
           and `sector` only), or `all` (clauses and guides, the default).
    limit: Maximum results to return (1–100, default 25).
    offset: Result offset for paging (default 0).
    sort: `title`, `date_published_desc`, or `date_modified_desc`.

Returns:
    JSON with "meta" (totals, scope, filters echoed back) and "results"
    (each hit has `id`, `url`, `title`, `content_type`, dates, and a
    `facets` map of all taxonomy arrays on the node). `content_type` is
    `clause`, `guide` or `legal_resource`, the same values that `search`
    returns.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNotitle
limitNo
scopeNoall
offsetNo
filtersYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
metaYes
resultsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / maximum
      Added value: +100
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / minimum
      Added value: +1
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset / minimum
      Added value: +0
    • addedInput schema / properties / scope / enum
      Added value: +[
      +  "clause",
      +  "guide",
      +  "legal_resource",
      +  "all"
      +]
    • addedInput schema / properties / sort / enum
      Added value: +[
      +  "title",
      +  "date_published_desc",
      +  "date_modified_desc"
      +]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "$defs": {
      +    "_TaxonomyContentHit": {
      +      "properties": {
      +        "content_type": {
      +          "title": "Content Type",
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "date_modified": {
      +          "anyOf": [
      +            {
      +              "type": "string"
      +            },
      +            {
      +              "type": "null"
      +            }
      +          ],
      +          "title": "Date Modified"
      +        },
      +        "date_published": {
      +          "anyOf": [
      +            {
      +              "type": "string"
      +            },
      +            {
      +              "type": "null"
      +            }
      +          ],
      +          "title": "Date Published"
      +        },
      +        "facets": {
      +          "additionalProperties": {
      +            "items": {
      +              "type": "string"
      +            },
      +            "type": "array"
      +          },
      +          "title": "Facets",
      +          "type": "object"
      +        },
      +        "id": {
      +          "title": "Id",
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "title": {
      +          "title": "Title",
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "url": {
      +          "title": "Url",
      +          "type": "string"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "title": "_TaxonomyContentHit",
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "_TaxonomyContentMeta": {
      +      "properties": {
      +        "filters": {
      +          "additionalProperties": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "title": "Filters",
      +          "type": "object"
      +        },
      +        "request_id": {
      +          "title": "Request Id",
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "scope": {
      +          "title": "Scope",
      +          "type": "string"
      +        },
      +        "took_ms": {
      +          "title": "Took Ms",
      +          "type": "integer"
      +        },
      +        "total_available": {
      +          "title": "Total Available",
      +          "type": "integer"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "required": [
      +        "total_available",
      +        "took_ms",
      +        "request_id",
      +        "scope",
      +        "filters"
      +      ],
      +      "title": "_TaxonomyContentMeta",
      +      "type": "object"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "properties": {
      +    "meta": {
      +      "$ref": "#/$defs/_TaxonomyContentMeta"
      +    },
      +    "results": {
      +      "items": {
      +        "$ref": "#/$defs/_TaxonomyContentHit"
      +      },
      +      "title": "Results",
      +      "type": "array"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "meta",
      +    "results"
      +  ],
      +  "title": "TaxonomyContentResult",
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/non-destructive, but the description adds genuinely useful behavior: multi-facet filters combine with AND, each facet may appear at most once, and invalid facet names yield a 400. Those error and composition semantics are not derivable from the annotations or schema.

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 one-line summary, then clearly labeled Args and Returns blocks; every sentence is informative. The Returns block is partly redundant with the existing output schema, though the content_type cross-reference to `search` adds value, so a small deduction.

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?

For a 5-parameter, nested-object, enum-heavy tool, the description covers the prerequisite call, filter syntax and constraints, scope semantics, paging/sorting, and result shape. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly on the first try.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and does: `filters` is a facet-name→slug map with a worked example and a cardinality rule, `scope` explains all four enum values including the legal_resource restriction, and `limit`/`offset`/`sort` get ranges, defaults and allowed values.

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 (List) and resource (TCLP content / legal resources) plus the filtering mechanism (taxonomy facet=value), and enumerates the scope variants. It cross-references the sibling `search` and `taxonomy_facets`, but never explicitly says why an agent should pick this over `search` or `find_legal_resources`, which overlap on content_type and legal_resource respectively.

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 a concrete prerequisite ('Call `taxonomy_facets` first') and the failure condition (unknown facet name returns 400), plus per-scope guidance such as legal_resource accepting only `jurisdiction` and `sector`. It stops short of stating when to prefer this tool over the sibling search/find_legal_resources tools.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources