Skip to main content
Glama
narumiruna

Taiwan Legislative Yuan MCP Server

get_legislator_meets

Retrieve meeting attendance records for legislators in Taiwan's Legislative Yuan by filtering with parameters like term, name, date, or meeting type.

Instructions

取得委員出席的會議列表。

Args:
    term: 屆,例:11
    name: 委員姓名,例:韓國瑜
    meet_term: 會議所屬屆期,例:11
    meeting_code: 會議代碼,例:院會-11-2-6
    session: 會期,例:2
    meeting_type: 會議種類,例:院會
    member: 出席委員,例:陳秀寳
    date: 日期,例:2024-10-25
    committee_code: 委員會代號,例:23
    meet_id: 會議編號,例:2024102368
    bill_no_nested: 關係文書議案編號,例:202110071090000
    law_number_nested: 關係文書法律編號,例:01177
    page: 頁數,預設1
    limit: 每頁筆數,預設20,建議不超過100
    output_fields: 自訂回傳欄位(如需指定欄位,請填寫欄位名稱列表)

Returns:
    str: JSON 格式的委員出席會議列表。

Raises:
    例外時回傳中文錯誤訊息字串。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
termYes屆,例:11
nameYes委員姓名,例:韓國瑜
meet_termNo會議所屬屆期,例:11
meeting_codeNo會議代碼,例:院會-11-2-6
sessionNo會期,例:2
meeting_typeNo會議種類,例:院會
memberNo出席委員,例:陳秀寳
dateNo日期,例:2024-10-25
committee_codeNo委員會代號,例:23
meet_idNo會議編號,例:2024102368
bill_no_nestedNo關係文書議案編號,例:202110071090000
law_number_nestedNo關係文書法律編號,例:01177
pageNo頁數,預設1
limitNo每頁筆數,預設20,建議不超過100
output_fieldsNo自訂回傳欄位(如需指定欄位,請填寫欄位名稱列表)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the return format ('JSON 格式的委員出席會議列表') and error handling ('例外時回傳中文錯誤訊息字串'), which is helpful. However, it doesn't describe pagination behavior beyond parameter defaults, rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether this is a read-only operation (though '取得' implies reading). For a query tool with 15 parameters, more behavioral context would be expected.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is reasonably structured with purpose statement, Args section, Returns, and Raises. However, it's somewhat verbose in listing all 15 parameters that are already documented in the schema. The purpose statement is clear but could be more front-loaded with key usage information. Some sentences (like the parameter list) don't earn their place since they duplicate schema information.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (15 parameters, no annotations, but with output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It states the purpose, documents parameters (though redundantly), and mentions return format and error handling. However, for a query tool with many filtering options and sibling alternatives, it lacks guidance on when to use it, performance characteristics, and relationship to other tools in the system.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 15 parameters thoroughly with descriptions and examples. The description adds minimal value beyond restating what's in the schema - it lists parameters but doesn't provide additional context about how they interact, which are most important, or filtering logic. The baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose as '取得委員出席的會議列表' (Get legislator attendance meeting list), which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_legislator' or 'get_meet' by focusing specifically on legislator meeting attendance. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar tools like 'get_committee_meets' or 'get_meet' in terms of scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools available (like get_legislator, get_meet, get_committee_meets), there's no indication of when this specific attendance-focused query is appropriate versus broader legislator or meeting queries. The only usage hint is implicit through the parameter list.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/narumiruna/ly-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server