UK Parliament MCP Server

search_treaties

Search UK international treaties and agreements under parliamentary scrutiny by keyword. Returns titles, countries involved, and scrutiny status for research on trade, diplomacy, or international law.

Instructions

Search UK international treaties and agreements under parliamentary scrutiny | treaties, international agreements, trade deals, diplomatic treaties, international law, bilateral agreements | Use for researching international relations, trade agreements, or diplomatic commitments | Returns treaty details including titles, countries involved, and parliamentary scrutiny status See also: search_treaties_advanced, get_treaty, get_treaty_business_items.

    Args:
        search_text: Search term for treaties. Examples: 'trade', 'EU', 'climate', 'Brexit'. Searches titles and content.

    Returns:
        Treaty details including titles, countries involved, and parliamentary scrutiny status.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`search_text`	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

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the search covers titles and content and what a result contains, but says nothing about pagination, result limits, permissions, or whether results are exhaustive. Adequate but thin for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 pipe-delimited keyword block is dense but the substantive text is front-loaded and short. However the return-value sentence appears twice — once in the prose and again under 'Returns' — which is redundant padding rather than added information.

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 one-parameter search tool with an output schema present, the description covers purpose, domain, query style, and result content, so an agent has enough to invoke it. The only real gap is routing guidance versus search_treaties_advanced, which is a usage rather than a completeness issue.

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 for the single search_text parameter — and it does, with concrete query examples ('trade', 'EU', 'climate', 'Brexit') and the explicit note that it searches titles and content. That meaningfully exceeds the bare string type in the schema.

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 and resource with scope: 'Search UK international treaties and agreements under parliamentary scrutiny'. The keyword list reinforces the domain. It names related siblings via 'See also' but does not explain how this differs from search_treaties_advanced, so the sibling boundary is left to inference.

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 for researching international relations, trade agreements, or diplomatic commitments' gives topical context for when this is relevant. However it never states when to prefer this over search_treaties_advanced or when to jump straight to get_treaty; the 'See also' list is a pointer, not a routing rule.

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

Deploy Server