UK Parliament MCP Server

get_hansard_pdfs_for_day

Retrieve official Hansard PDF transcripts for a specific UK Parliament sitting day by date and house (Commons or Lords), returning available document links.

Instructions

Get PDF documents for a specific sitting day | Hansard, PDFs, daily documents | Use to retrieve official PDF transcripts for a parliamentary sitting day | Returns list of PDF links for that day

    Args:
        date: Date in YYYY-MM-DD format.
        house: House: 1 or 'Commons', 2 or 'Lords'.

    Returns:
        List of PDF documents available for that sitting day.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes
`house`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 6, 2026

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 full burden. It discloses that the result is a list of PDF documents/links, which confirms read-only retrieval context, but says nothing about permissions, pagination, or limits. For a no-annotation read tool this is adequate but shallow.

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 purpose, then compact Args/Returns sections. The pipe-separated keyword line mildly duplicates the opening sentence, but overall it is well-sized with little waste.

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?

Both required parameters are fully explained and an output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed (the description still notes the return shape). The only gap is the absence of sibling-routing guidance in a very crowded namespace.

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 must compensate, and it does: date is documented as YYYY-MM-DD format, and the ambiguous house parameter (anyOf integer|string, no enum) is spelled out as 1/'Commons' or 2/'Lords'. This is exactly the meaning the bare schema lacks.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('Get PDF documents for a specific sitting day') and reinforces it with the keyword line naming Hansard, PDFs, and daily documents. It clearly distinguishes this document-retrieval tool from siblings like get_hansard_sitting_day in the large tool set.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'Use to retrieve official PDF transcripts for a parliamentary sitting day' restates the purpose as usage context, implying when it fits, but names no alternatives or exclusions. Given the huge sibling list (get_hansard_sitting_day, search_hansard, etc.), the agent gets no routing criteria for choosing this over them.

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

Deploy Server