Skip to main content
Glama
ChrisBrooksbank

UK Parliament MCP Server

by ChrisBrooksbank
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_speaker_and_deputies

Find out who was Speaker or Deputy Speaker in the House of Commons on a given date and get their member details.

Instructions

Get the Speaker of the Commons and Deputy Speakers for a date | Speaker, Deputy Speaker, House officers | Use when you need to know who was Speaker or a Deputy Speaker on a given date | Returns member details for the Speaker and Deputy Speakers

    Args:
        for_date: Date for which to return the Speaker and Deputy Speakers (YYYY-MM-DD).

    Returns:
        Member details for the Speaker and Deputy Speakers on the given date.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
for_dateYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
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 disclosure burden. It states that it returns member details for the Speaker and Deputy Speakers, but says nothing about permissions, rate limits, or behaviour when no Speaker exists for the date. Adequate but thin for an unannotated tool.

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?

Front-loaded and readable, but the pipe-delimited keyword list ('Speaker, Deputy Speaker, House officers') is filler, and the return value is stated twice – once in the header line and again in the Returns block. Some redundancy costs it a point.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained; the description adequately covers what the tool does, its single argument, and its use condition. Little is missing for a tool of this simplicity.

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%, but the description documents the single required parameter and supplies the format (YYYY-MM-DD), which the schema omits. That added detail effectively compensates for the coverage gap for a one-parameter tool.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (the Speaker of the Commons and Deputy Speakers) scoped by a date, which distinguishes it from the many member-related siblings. It does not explicitly contrast with near-neighbours like get_spokespersons or get_debate_speakers, so a 4 rather than 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?

The line 'Use when you need to know who was Speaker or a Deputy Speaker on a given date' gives a clear use condition. There is no statement of when NOT to use it and no named alternative among the siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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