ph-compliance-mcp

Implementing rules references for a statute

show_implementing_rules

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) references to a statute, including citing cases, for Philippine law compliance research.

Instructions

Find corpus references to the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of a statute — citations mentioning IRR that resolve to the statute, with the citing cases.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max results (default 50, max 100)
`statute`	Yes	Statute short title, e.g. 'Data Privacy Act of 2012'
`actNumber`	No	Optional act number override, e.g. '10173'

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`statute`	Yes
`references`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.12.0Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the operation as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavior: it resolves citations to the statute and includes citing cases, which tells the agent the returned references are filtered rather than raw mentions. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core function and key output without filler. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With a full parameter schema, an output schema, and safety annotations, the description provides all essential calling context. The IRR-resolution detail covers the one non-obvious behavior an agent needs to anticipate.

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 coverage is 100%: all three parameters (statute, limit, actNumber) have descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail, so it stays at the baseline of 3.

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?

States a specific verb ('Find'), a specific resource ('Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of a statute'), and the output ('citations... with the citing cases'). This clearly separates it from sibling tools like show_amendments or show_citations.

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?

The description implies the use case (retrieving IRR references for a statute) but never explicitly says when to choose it over related siblings such as show_citations or show_cross_references, nor does it state when not to use it.

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