legal-review-agent
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| legal_reviewA | Evaluate a business decision for legal risk. Call this tool when a user asks whether a business action is legal, wants to know the legal risk of a decision, or needs to understand compliance requirements. The tool returns a legal analysis framework with a knowledge base. Use it to produce a structured GREEN/YELLOW/RED verdict with statute citations, compliant alternatives, and whether the user needs a real attorney. Args: question: A plain-English description of the business decision being considered. Example: "Can I scrape Google reviews and put them on my client's website?" state: Optional US state abbreviation for state-specific analysis (e.g., "MA", "CA", "NY"). When provided, the analysis prioritizes that state's laws alongside federal law. business_type: Optional business type for industry-specific context (e.g., "restaurant", "web agency", "healthcare startup"). |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusing it with another tool. The purpose of legal_review is clearly defined and distinct by default.
A single tool named legal_review uses a clear, descriptive snake_case format. There are no other tools to create naming inconsistencies.
One tool is on the thin side, but it is reasonably appropriate for a narrowly-scoped legal review agent. The tool is parameterized enough to handle different questions, states, and business types.
The tool fully covers the stated domain of evaluating legal risk for a business decision. It handles jurisdiction and business-type context and returns actionable next steps, so there are no obvious dead ends.