Skip to main content
Glama
Honeyfield-Org

eurlex-mcp-server

by Honeyfield-Org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

eurlex_fetch

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch the full text of EU legal acts using CELEX ID, ELI, or OJ reference, with pagination support for long documents.

Instructions

Fetches the full text of an EU legal act. Identify it by celex_id (e.g. "32024R1689"), by eli (e.g. "reg/2016/679" or a full ELI URL), or by oj_ref (post-2023 Official Journal reference, e.g. "OJ:L_202401689") — provide exactly one. Paginate long documents with offset and max_chars: pass the previous response's next_offset to continue reading until it is null.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eliNoEuropean Legislation Identifier (ELI), short or full form, e.g. "reg/2016/679" or "http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj" (GDPR). Resolved to a CELEX ID via Cellar. Provide exactly one of celex_id, eli, or oj_ref.
formatNoOutput format: xhtml=structured XHTML, plain=text with XHTML tags strippedxhtml
offsetNoCharacter offset for pagination (0-based)
oj_refNoOfficial Journal reference in the post-2023 scheme, e.g. "OJ:L_202401689" (AI Act). Resolved to a CELEX ID via Cellar. Provide exactly one of celex_id, eli, or oj_ref.
celex_idNoCELEX identifier, e.g. "32024R1689" (AI Act). Provide exactly one of celex_id, eli, or oj_ref.
languageNoLanguage of the full text, as a Cellar 3-letter code (any of the 24 official EU languages, e.g. DEU, ENG, FRA, POL, SPA)ENG
max_charsNoMaximum number of characters returned

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
offsetYesThe offset this window was sliced from
contentYesThe document text in the requested window/format
celex_idYesThe resolved CELEX ID the text was fetched for
languageYesCellar 3-letter language code of the text
truncatedYesTrue when more text remains beyond this window
source_urlYesCellar REST URL of the fetched resource
next_offsetYesOffset to request next, or null when there is no more content
total_charsYesLength of the full processed document
returned_charsYesLength of `content`

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.4.2
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedOutput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.3.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / language / default
      Previous value: -"DEU"New value: +"ENG"
  3. First observedv2.2.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description is consistent with the readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint annotations, but it does not add any behavioral context beyond those annotations (e.g., no side effects, no rate limits, no error behavior). Since annotations already cover the safety profile, this is adequate but not enhanced.

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?

The description is two sentences, tightly packed with essential operational details (identifier selection, pagination) and contains no extraneous information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the detailed output schema and high parameter coverage, the description provides sufficient context for invocation: identifier selection, pagination, and format choice. No critical information is missing for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra clarity on pagination semantics (pass previous next_offset) and the mutual exclusivity of identifier parameters, which exceeds the schema-only information.

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?

The description clearly states the tool fetches the full text of an EU legal act, and identifies the three mutually exclusive identifier options (celex_id, eli, oj_ref). This is specific and 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?

The description provides explicit guidance on pagination (using offset and max_chars, passing next_offset) and insists on providing exactly one identifier. However, it does not explicitly compare against sibling tools (e.g., eurlex_summary, eurlex_metadata) to indicate when this tool is preferred.

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