Lextiva Compliance MCP Server

get_document_type

Retrieve the full record for a document type, including typical sections, target audience, and the regulations that mandate it. Use identifiers like 'privacy_policy' or 'dpa'.

Instructions

Returns the full record for a single document type — typical sections, audience, and which regulations mandate it. Pass ids like 'privacy_policy', 'dpa', 'ai_use_policy'.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_document_type"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Document type id (e.g. 'privacy_policy', 'dpa')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0May 28, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses what the record contains (sections, audience, regulations) but does not mention error handling, missing ids, or other behavioral traits.

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: first states purpose and content, second gives example ids. No wasted words, front-loaded with key 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 single-parameter read tool without output schema, the description adequately explains what the record contains. Missing details about error cases or limitations, but overall sufficient.

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?

The only parameter 'id' is fully described in the input schema with examples. The tool description adds no new parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, though it provides context about the returned content.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns the full record for a single document type, specifying typical content (sections, audience, regulations). It distinguishes from siblings like list_document_types (returns list) and regulations_for_document (returns regulations).

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?

Description gives example ids to pass and implies usage when needing full details for one document type. It does not explicitly exclude other cases or mention alternatives, but the context is clear.

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

Deploy Server