Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Lextiva Compliance MCP Server

Lextiva Compliance MCP Server

by arturayupov
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

regulations_for_document

Find every regulation that mandates or permits a document type and lists required clauses.

Instructions

Given a document type id, returns every regulation that mandates or permits that document, with required clauses for each. Use this when a user asks 'which laws require a Privacy Policy / DPA / Cookie 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": {
      "document_id": "<document_id>"
    },
    "name": "regulations_for_document"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
document_idYesDocument type id (e.g. 'privacy_policy', 'dpa')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
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 states what the tool returns (regulations with required clauses) but does not explicitly disclose any behavioral traits (e.g., read-only, auth requirements). Behavior is adequately implied for a query tool.

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 long, with the main purpose front-loaded and a usage hint in the second sentence. Every word adds value; no redundancy.

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?

For a simple single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully explains the input and output. It is complete and self-contained.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with a clear description for 'document_id'. The description adds value by providing example values (e.g., 'privacy_policy'), which helps the agent understand valid inputs beyond the schema.

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 action ('returns every regulation that mandates or permits that document') and the resource ('given a document type id'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'documents_for_regulation' by specifying the direction of the mapping.

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 explicitly provides a usage example ('Use this when a user asks...'), which helps the agent determine when to invoke it. However, it does not mention when not to use it or explicitly compare to alternatives.

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