Skip to main content
Glama
paulieb89

UK Legal Research MCP Server

by paulieb89
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Remote

Format OSCOLA Citation String

citations_format_oscola
Read-onlyIdempotent

Formats parsed UK legal citations into OSCOLA 4th edition style after resolving them. Refuses formatting when confidence is zero or neutral citations lack a URL to prevent fabrication.

Instructions

USE THIS TOOL AFTER citations_resolve to produce the correctly formatted OSCOLA citation string.

Pass the parsed fields returned by citations_resolve directly into this tool. Formats per OSCOLA 4th edition rules for each citation type.

Refuses (status: upstream_validation) if confidence is 0.0 — TNA confirmed the document does not exist — or if a neutral citation has no resolved_url (ambiguous court code, e.g. bare EWHC without a division). In either case, do NOT manufacture a citation; surface the failure and ask the user for the source URL or better identifying details.

DO NOT construct the input fields yourself. The structured input must come from citations_resolve — guessing fields is the primary citation-fabrication route and this tool is the guard against it.

Authoritative OSCOLA formatting for UK legal citations (no network call).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
citation_typeYes'type' field from citations_resolve result.
confidenceYes'confidence' from citations_resolve. Refuses to format if 0.0 — that means TNA confirmed the document does not exist. Pass only the value citations_resolve returned; do not guess.
resolved_urlNo'resolved_url' from citations_resolve. Must be non-null for neutral citations.
yearNo'year' from citations_resolve.
courtNo'court' from citations_resolve, e.g. 'UKSC', 'EWCA CIV', 'EWHC (KB)'.
numberNo'number' from citations_resolve (judgment number within the year).
report_seriesNo'report_series' from citations_resolve, e.g. 'WLR', 'AC', 'QB'.
volumeNo'volume' from citations_resolve (law report volume, if any).
pageNo'page' from citations_resolve (starting page in the law report).
legislation_titleNo'legislation_title' from citations_resolve, e.g. 'Companies Act 2006'.
sectionNo'section' from citations_resolve, e.g. '47', '12', '20A'.
si_yearNo'si_year' from citations_resolve.
si_numberNo'si_number' from citations_resolve.
rawNo'raw' from citations_resolve. Used as-is for EU retained law — the original text preserves the Regulation/Directive distinction.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Tool Definition Quality

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds value by stating it formats per OSCOLA 4th edition, is authoritative for UK legal citations, and makes no network call. It also describes refusal behavior for low confidence or missing resolved_url.

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?

The description is a single paragraph that is front-loaded with the main purpose and includes key instructions, but it could be slightly more structured. However, it is reasonably concise and every sentence adds value.

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 complexity of the tool (14 parameters, multiple citation types), the description and schema together provide comprehensive guidance: usage, failure modes, and constraints. An output schema exists, and the description explains return behavior via status, making it complete.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, each parameter is described as coming from citations_resolve, which is reinforced in the description. The description adds the crucial guidance that fields must not be guessed, providing context 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 tool formats an OSCOLA citation string after citations_resolve, specifying the verb 'Format' and resource 'OSCOLA Citation String', and it implicitly distinguishes from siblings by being the only formatting tool.

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?

The description explicitly says to use the tool after citations_resolve, instructs not to construct input fields but to pass from resolve, and details failure cases with guidance to surface errors, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use.

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/paulieb89/uk-legal-mcp'

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