Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
UK Parliament MCP Server

UK Parliament MCP Server

by ChrisBrooksbank
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

check_lords_divisions_exist

Check if the House of Lords held divisions on a given date. Returns true or false; use before searching Lords divisions for that day.

Instructions

Check whether the Lords held divisions on a date | did the Lords vote, division day check | Use before searching Lords divisions for a specific day | Returns true or false. See also: search_lords_divisions.

    Args:
        date: Date to check (YYYY-MM-DD).

    Returns:
        true if divisions exist for the date, otherwise false.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.19.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the boolean outcome and implies a pure existence check, but does not state that the call is side-effect free, permission-free, or cheap to call in a loop — meaningful for a predicate tool an agent may invoke per date.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The core sentence is front-loaded and useful, but the pipe-separated keyword variants ('did the Lords vote, division day check') are filler, and the boolean return is stated twice across the prose and the Returns block, which is redundant given an output schema exists.

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?

For a single-argument read-only predicate with an output schema, the description covers the purpose, the date format, the sibling relationship, and the return type. Remaining gaps are only around cost/permission behavior, which is minor here.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the schema gives only a bare string, so the description's 'Date to check (YYYY-MM-DD)' supplies the missing format that the schema omits. With only one parameter, this is close to fully specified.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Check whether the Lords held divisions on a date') and immediately distinguishes itself from the sibling search_lords_divisions. An agent can tell it apart from the search/list tools without opening a 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?

'Use before searching Lords divisions for a specific day' plus 'See also: search_lords_divisions' gives explicit sequencing and names the alternative. No exclusion cases are stated, but the intended pre-check workflow is unambiguous.

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