Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Swedish Data Protection MCP

Swedish Data Protection MCP

by Ansvar-Systems
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

se_dp_get_decision

Retrieve a specific Swedish data protection decision from IMY using its reference number, such as DI-2020-11332.

Instructions

Get a specific IMY decision by reference number (e.g., 'DI-2020-11332', 'IMY-2022-6524').

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "reference": "<reference>"
    },
    "name": "se_dp_get_decision"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
referenceYesIMY decision reference (e.g., 'DI-2020-11332', 'IMY-2022-6524')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. However, it does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, or has any side effects. The description only states what the tool does, not how it behaves.

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?

The description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. No unnecessary words; every part contributes meaning.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is sufficient for an agent to understand its purpose and usage. It could be enhanced by noting what the response contains, but that's optional.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The schema covers 100% of parameters with a description. The tool description adds concrete examples of reference numbers, which helps the agent understand the expected format. This adds value beyond the schema.

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 description clearly states it retrieves a specific IMY decision by reference number, with examples. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like se_dp_search_decisions by focusing on a single known decision.

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?

The description implies when to use: when you have a specific reference number. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the mention of 'by reference number' guides the agent to only use this tool if a reference is available, otherwise search.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools