UK Parliament MCP Server

search_event_activities

Search committee event activities across UK Parliament, filtering by committee, date, house, location, event type, or keyword to find matching agendas and sessions.

Instructions

Search committee event activities | event agenda items, meeting activities, committee sessions | Use to find activities across committee events with flexible filtering | Returns event activities matching criteria

    Args:
        committee_id: Optional: filter by committee ID.
        committee_business_id: Optional: filter by committee business ID.
        search_term: Optional: search term for activity titles or content (min 2 chars).
        start_date_from: Optional: start date from in YYYY-MM-DD format.
        start_date_to: Optional: start date to in YYYY-MM-DD format.
        house: Optional: filter by house - 1 or 'Commons', 2 or 'Lords'.
        location_id: Optional: location ID to filter events.
        event_type_id: Optional: filter by event type ID.
        include_activity_attendees: Include attendees with each activity. Default: false.
        show_on_website_only: Show only events visible on website. Default: true.
        skip: Number of records to skip (for pagination).
        take: Number of records to return (default 30, max 100).

    Returns:
        Event activities matching the specified criteria.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`skip`	No
`take`	No
`house`	No
`location_id`	No
`search_term`	No
`committee_id`	No
`event_type_id`	No
`start_date_to`	No
`start_date_from`	No
`show_on_website_only`	No
`committee_business_id`	No
`include_activity_attendees`	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

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does disclose useful constraints not in the schema (search_term min 2 chars, take max 100, date format, defaults for show_on_website_only and include_activity_attendees), but says nothing about read-only semantics, permission requirements, or pagination behavior beyond skip/take.

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 purpose is front-loaded, which is good, but the pipe-separated keyword list reads as padding and the closing 'Returns event activities matching the specified criteria' merely restates the opening. The Args block is long but earns most of its space given zero schema coverage.

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 12-parameter search with no annotations but a present output schema, the definition covers every parameter and adds formats and limits, so an agent can invoke it correctly. The remaining gap is the absence of any behavioral/safety context that annotations would normally supply.

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 document all 12 parameters, and it largely does: it supplies date format, the house enum values (1/'Commons', 2/'Lords'), the min-length rule for search_term, and defaults for the two booleans. A few entries (location_id, event_type_id) are near-tautological, but coverage is strong overall.

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 specific verb and resource ('Search committee event activities') and elaborates the domain ('event agenda items, meeting activities, committee sessions'). This distinguishes it from the retrieval siblings like get_event_activities or get_committee_events, though it never names them explicitly, so the differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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 find activities across committee events with flexible filtering' gives the intended context but offers no when-not guidance and never references the sibling tools (get_event_activities, get_committee_events) that could also be selected. Usage is implied rather than delineated.

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

Deploy Server