UK Parliament MCP Server

get_publications

Search UK Parliament committee publications, including reports and government responses, by keyword, date, or committee to research outputs and track paper numbers.

Instructions

Search for committee publications including reports, government responses, and other documents. Use when researching committee outputs, finding reports on specific topics, or tracking publication dates and paper numbers. See also: get_publication_by_id, get_committee_publications_summary.

    Args:
        search_term: Optional: search term for publication titles or content.
        start_date: Optional: start date in YYYY-MM-DD format.
        end_date: Optional: end date in YYYY-MM-DD format.
        committee_business_id: Optional: committee business ID to filter by.
        committee_id: Optional: committee ID to filter by.
        show_on_website_only: Show only publications visible on website.
        skip: Number of records to skip (for pagination).
        take: Number of records to return (default 30, max 100).

    Returns:
        Committee publications matching the criteria.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`skip`	No
`take`	No
`end_date`	No
`start_date`	No
`search_term`	No
`committee_id`	No
`show_on_website_only`	No
`committee_business_id`	No

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

A4.1/5.0

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 behavioral burden. 'Search' reasonably implies a non-mutating read and the Args block discloses pagination semantics (skip, take default 30 / max 100), but there is no explicit statement that it is read-only, no mention of result limits or ordering behavior, leaving the safety/mutation profile for an agent to infer.

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?

Well-structured with purpose and usage front-loaded, then Args and Returns blocks. Every line earns its place, though the Returns line 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 an 8-parameter search tool with zero required params and an existing output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, routing, and every parameter. Nothing critical is missing, but with no annotations it could say more about scope, ordering, and result limits.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does document all 8 parameters. It adds real value with the YYYY-MM-DD date formats, the take default/max, and pagination intent, though a few entries (e.g., 'committee_id: committee ID to filter by') are near-tautological restatements.

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 (search) and resource (committee publications) and enumerates the document kinds covered (reports, government responses, other documents). It also names the sibling tools it is distinct from, so an agent can separate it from get_publication_by_id and get_committee_publications_summary without opening any 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?

Gives concrete use cases (researching committee outputs, finding reports on topics, tracking dates and paper numbers) and routes to alternatives via 'See also'. It stops short of stating when NOT to use it or how to choose between the named siblings, so routing is helpful but not fully explicit.

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

Deploy Server