UK Business Tools - Ledgerhall

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get Member Debates

law_parliament_member_debates

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search a UK MP's Hansard debate contributions by exact phrase. Provide a member ID and topic tokens to retrieve only contributions where the member spoke those exact words.

Instructions

USE THIS TOOL WHEN you have a member_id and want contributions where THAT member used a specific topic phrase verbatim (text-body search).

CALL parliament_find_member(name) FIRST to obtain the integer member_id.

This is a name-based text-body search — it matches contributions whose TEXT contains the topic phrase. A member who spoke in a debate but didn't use your phrase verbatim is filtered out. For verbatim retrieval of every contribution by a member in a known debate (regardless of vocabulary), use parliament_get_debate_contributions(debate_ext_id, member_id=...) instead.

Each contribution's text field is capped at 3000 characters.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum contributions to return. Default 20.
`topic`	No	Optional phrase to find in THIS member's contribution text bodies. Hansard searches the words the member actually said, NOT the topic or title of the debate. Pass tokens this member would have spoken — distinctive arguments ('disproportionate sanction'), statutory references ('section 21'), or motion numbers ('Motion C1') — not the bill's name (members rarely say e.g. 'Renters\' Rights Bill' verbatim in their speeches). If you want 'every contribution this member made in a specific debate' regardless of words used, find the debate_ext_id then use parliament_get_debate_contributions(debate_ext_id, member_id=...).
`offset`	No	Number of contributions to skip before this page. Default 0. Re-call with offset=offset+returned while has_more is true.
`member_id`	Yes	Parliament Members API integer ID. Obtain from parliament_find_member.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Page size requested
`topic`	No	Topic phrase filter applied, if any
`total`	Yes	Number of contributions returned in this call
`offset`	No	Skip applied to this page
`has_more`	No	True if a full page was returned (more may exist)
`member_id`	Yes	Parliament Members API member ID
`contributions`	No	Hansard contributions for the member. Each `text` field is capped at 3000 characters.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.1Sep 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld), but the description adds useful behavior beyond them: matching is verbatim text-body only, non-matching contributions are filtered out, and each contribution's text is capped at 3000 characters. It does not cover rate limits or auth, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

It is front-loaded with the primary use case, then prerequisite, caveat, and alternative. The structure is scannable and every sentence serves a purpose, though some content duplicates the schema's already detailed parameter descriptions.

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?

Given the output schema exists and the annotations cover safety, the description supplies what an agent still needs: member_id sourcing, verbatim text-search semantics, the distinction from the alternative tool, and the text truncation limit. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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 member_id, topic, limit, and offset in detail. The description largely reinforces the topic semantics already present in the schema and adds the member_id prerequisite, but does not significantly extend parameter meaning beyond the structured fields. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a precise verb and resource: it returns contributions by a specific member matching a topic phrase via text-body search. It also explicitly distinguishes this tool from parliament_get_debate_contributions, so an agent can tell which sibling to use without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives explicit when-to-use conditions ('WHEN you have a member_id and want contributions where THAT member used a specific topic phrase verbatim'), a prerequisite ('CALL parliament_find_member FIRST'), and a named alternative with the exact situation that selects it. This is complete routing guidance.

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

Deploy Server