get_ping_pong_item_by_id

Retrieve detailed information about a specific UK Parliament ping pong item, such as a final-stage amendment or motion, using bill, stage, and item IDs.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a specific ping pong item (amendment or motion). Use when you need complete details about final stage amendments or motions in the legislative process.

    Args:
        bill_id: Bill ID.
        bill_stage_id: Bill stage ID.
        ping_pong_item_id: Ping pong item ID to get details for.

    Returns:
        Detailed information about the ping pong item.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`bill_id`	Yes
`bill_stage_id`	Yes
`ping_pong_item_id`	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

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get' implies a read-only operation and 'Returns: Detailed information' indicates the output shape, but there is no mention of permissions, error behavior, or how IDs relate to one another. This is minimally adequate for a read-only detail endpoint, but significant gaps remain.

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 description is front-loaded with the tool's purpose and organized with Args and Returns sections. It is reasonably concise, though the Args section largely duplicates the schema without adding value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained in detail. However, with three required parameters at 0% schema description coverage and no annotations, the description should provide more context about parameter relationships and when to prefer this tool over sibling list or amendment tools. It is adequate but incomplete.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must fully compensate for parameter semantics. The Args section only restates the parameter names as 'Bill ID', 'Bill stage ID', and 'Ping pong item ID to get details for', adding essentially no meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain how to obtain these IDs or how the three identifiers relate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb+resource ('Get detailed information about a specific ping pong item') and clarifies the domain as amendments or motions in final legislative stages. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools such as get_bill_stage_ping_pong_items or get_amendment_by_id, so it falls short of a 5.

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 a clear usage context ('Use when you need complete details about final stage amendments or motions in the legislative process'), which is enough to indicate when this tool is appropriate. However, it does not name alternatives or state when not to use it, such as when only a list of ping pong items is needed.

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

Deploy Server

UK Parliament MCP Server