Skip to main content
Glama
paulieb89

UK Legal Research MCP Server

by paulieb89
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Remote

Get Contributions In A Debate

parliament_get_debate_contributions
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve verbatim contributions from a UK parliamentary debate. Filter by member ID to get everything a specific member said, regardless of vocabulary used.

Instructions

USE THIS TOOL WHEN you have a debate_ext_id and want verbatim contributions, optionally filtered to one member.

Canonical path for "everything a member said in this debate" regardless of vocabulary — text-search tools (parliament_member_debates, parliament_search_hansard) filter by contribution TEXT, dropping members who spoke without using your phrase verbatim. This tool filters by MemberId on the debate's Items list, so vocabulary doesn't matter.

Typical chain: parliament_find_member(name) → member_id, then parliament_search_hansard or parliament_lookup_by_column → debate_ext_id, then this tool. The parliament module's instructions describe the full composition pattern.

Without member_id, returns every contribution (~100-200 for a long debate).

If the wire returns no contributions for a member you expect to have spoken, report the empty result honestly — do NOT reconstruct quotes from training data. Authoritative source for member contributions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
debate_ext_idYesDebate GUID (DebateSectionExtId). Chain from parliament_search_hansard top_debates[].debate_ext_id, parliament_lookup_by_column matches[].debate_ext_id, or any tool that surfaces a debate identifier.
member_idNoOptional integer Members API ID. When given, only that member's contributions in this debate are returned — regardless of which words they used. Resolves via parliament_find_member. When omitted, every contribution in the debate is returned (typical debate: 100-200 items).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
member_idYesParliament Members API member ID
topicNoTopic phrase filter applied, if any
offsetNoSkip applied to this page
limitNoPage size requested
totalYesNumber of contributions returned in this call
has_moreNoTrue if a full page was returned (more may exist)
contributionsNoHansard contributions for the member. Each `text` field is capped at 3000 characters.

Tool Definition Quality

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. Description adds context about expected item count (100-200), clarifies that vocabulary doesn't matter, and warns against reconstructing quotes. Does not contradict annotations.

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?

Compact yet thorough. Every sentence adds value—usage instruction, chain guidance, behavioral notes, and a pitfall warning. Well-organized with clear sections.

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 complexity, annotations, and output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: when to use, how to chain, what to expect, and how to handle empty results. Complements structured fields effectively.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description reinforces schema information (e.g., where to get debate_ext_id, effect of member_id) but does not add significant new parameter semantics beyond what schema already provides.

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?

Clearly states verb (get contributions), resource (debate contributions), and scope (by debate_ext_id, optionally filtered by member_id). Distinguishes from sibling tools like parliament_member_debates by explaining the difference in filtering logic.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use (when you have debate_ext_id) and when to provide member_id vs omit. Provides a typical chain with other tools and instructs to report empty results honestly, avoiding hallucination.

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