The hierarchy: the titles (no argument), a title's chapters ('36'), or a chapter's sections ('36-60'), one line each with counts, citation spans, and twin URLs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| node | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds that it returns one line per node with counts and citation spans but does not explain side effects or output format details.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is compact and front-loads the key hierarchy levels and examples. It is not verbose, though the phrase 'twin URLs' is ambiguous and could be clarified without much extra length.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the available sibling tools and no output schema, the description leaves out essential context such as the meaning of 'twin URLs', the exact format of output lines, and how this browsing tool relates to specific lookup tools.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The single parameter 'node' is shown with default null and a string/null type, but the description only indirectly explains it via examples like '36' and '36-60'. It does not define what values are valid or how null behaves.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states it browses a hierarchy with titles, chapters, and sections but does not explicitly name the verb as 'browse' nor clarify what 'twin URLs' refers to. It distinguishes from siblings somewhat by mentioning hierarchy levels.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like code_describe_structure, code_find_chapter, or code_get_chapter. The description implies browsing but does not state conditions for selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a unique and clearly defined purpose, separated by collection (bills, code, opinions, constitution) and action (list, lookup, search, get_text, browse, etc.). No two tools overlap in functionality.
Tool names follow a consistent pattern of collection_action (e.g., bills_list, code_search, opinions_lookup) with snake_case and descriptive verbs. General tools use clear single-word names like search, fetch, and verify_quote.
With 23 tools, the set is slightly larger than the typical 3โ15 range, but it is appropriate for a comprehensive legal database covering multiple collections and specialized operations (browse, describe, find, verify). The count is justified by the domain's breadth.
The tool set covers all major legal collections (bills, code, constitution, opinions) with CRUD-like operations (list, lookup, search, get_text) and includes cross-cutting utilities (search, fetch, verify_quote, describe_site, get_coverage). No obvious gaps in the expected functionality.