Skip to main content
Glama
DweskZ

EcuDataMCP

by DweskZ
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Ver detalle de una regulación de gob.ec

get_regulacion_info
Read-only

Fetch an Ecuadorian gob.ec regulation's type, Registro Oficial reference, description, and PDF link by ID, enabling follow-up PDF text reading.

Instructions

One gob.ec regulation's type, Registro Oficial reference, description and PDF link. Take regulacion_id from search_regulaciones; read the PDF's text with read_pdf.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formatNotext summary (default) or json structured result.text
regulacion_idYesRegulation ID (e.g. "5051")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.13.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.10.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / format / description
      Added value: +"text summary (default) or json structured result."
    • addedInput schema / properties / regulacion_id / description
      Added value: +"Regulation ID (e.g. \"5051\")"
  3. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.8.14
    • removedInput schema / properties / format / title
      Removed value: -"Format"
    • removedInput schema / properties / regulacion_id / title
      Removed value: -"Regulacion Id"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"get_regulacion_infoArguments"
    • removedOutput schema / title
      Removed value: -"get_regulacion_infoDictOutput"
  4. First observedv0.8.12

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and network profile is covered structurally. The description adds the downstream workflow hint (read_pdf), but says nothing about error handling, whether the PDF link may be absent, or rate limits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences with zero filler; the resource and its fields come first, followed by the ID source and the follow-up tool. Every clause earns its place.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by listing the returned fields. With annotations covering the safety profile and the schema covering both parameters, the definition is essentially complete, missing only edge-case behavior for a nonexistent ID.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented (regulacion_id with an example, format with its enum and default). The description only adds the provenance of the ID value ('from search_regulaciones') and says nothing about the format parameter.

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 names the resource (a single gob.ec regulation) and enumerates the returned fields (type, Registro Oficial reference, description, PDF link), which clearly separates it from the sibling search_regulaciones. It lacks an explicit verb such as 'retrieve/fetch detail', but the intent is unambiguous.

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 an explicit call sequence: obtain regulacion_id from search_regulaciones and then use read_pdf to read the PDF text. That routes the agent to the correct sibling tools, though it does not state any when-not-to-use condition or failure cases.

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