Skip to main content
Glama

Lexiara

by org.lexiara
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Guidance on one provision

guidance_for_provision
Read-onlyIdempotent

Sections of official GUIDANCE that discuss one provision — Commission notices and guidelines on the act, quoted verbatim with the section number the publisher prints, so an answer can cite '§2.8 of the UCPD Guidance' and be checked.

EVERY ROW IS NON-BINDING (binding: false). This is the enforcing body's own reading, not law: only the instrument's text has legal force, and only a court settles what it means. Never present a guidance section as the rule; cite it as guidance, name the document, and keep it separate from the provision text lookup_provision returns.

Lexiara Nexus data requires an API key on a signed-in account. The free plan carries a monthly Nexus allowance; the legislative text itself is always free.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eIdYesProvision identifier: 'sec_4' (section 4), 'art_2__para_1' (article 2(1)), 'sch_9' (Schedule 9). Use search or history endpoints to discover eIds.
workYesELI URI of the instrument, e.g. 'http://www.legislation.gov.uk/id/ukpga/1994/23' (UK VAT Act 1994) or 'http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2006/112/oj' (EU VAT Directive).
includeActLevelNoAlso return sections that name the act but no article. Off by default: a notice's introduction cites the whole directive and would otherwise appear under every article of it.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "The JSON response from the corresponding Lexiara API route.",
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, it discloses that every row is non-binding (binding: false), that this is the enforcing body's reading rather than law, and how it must be presented. It also states the auth requirement (API key on a signed-in account) and the free-plan allowance, which annotations cannot convey.

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?

The message is front-loaded with the core purpose and scoped into purpose, caution, and access paragraphs. It is slightly repetitive in restating the 'cite as guidance, not the rule' point twice, but every paragraph carries distinct information.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and all three parameters are documented in the schema with annotations covering the safety profile. The description fills the remaining gaps — non-binding status, citation discipline, and authentication requirements.

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 eId, work, and includeActLevel are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds citation formatting context ('section number the publisher prints') but nothing about parameter syntax or defaults beyond what the schema provides — the 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?

The opening sentence states a specific verb and resource — 'Sections of official GUIDANCE that discuss one provision' — and immediately contrasts it with the legislative text that lookup_provision returns. An agent can distinguish this from sibling tools without opening the 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?

It gives clear usage context (use for verifiable citations like '§2.8 of the UCPD Guidance') and names the alternative to keep it separate from — lookup_provision. It stops short of an explicit 'use this when / do not use this when' rule set, so 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 Lexiara 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