Skip to main content
Glama

read_legal_resource

Retrieve full legal text and automatically resolve references within South Korean statutes, precedents, and administrative rules using their Typed ID.

Instructions

Reads the full content of a specific legal resource using its Typed ID.

Args:
    resource_id: A string strictly in the format `type:id` (e.g., "statute:12345", "prec:98765", "admrul:54321").
                 The ID is obtained from the `search_korean_law` output.

Features:
- **Full Text Retrieval**: Fetches the complete text of statutes, precedents, or rules.
- **Reference Resolution**: Automatically detects references to other laws (e.g., "refer to Article 5") within the text
  and appends their content to the response, saving you extra round-trips.
- **Robustness**: Automatically handles ID formatting issues or outdated IDs by trying fallbacks (ID -> MST -> Detc).

Return:
- Markdown formatted text containing the resource metadata, body content, and resolved references.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resource_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and excels. It discloses key behavioral traits: full text retrieval, automatic reference resolution with appended content, and robustness with fallback handling for ID issues. This goes beyond basic functionality to explain how the tool behaves in practice.

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?

The description is well-structured with sections (Args, Features, Return), front-loaded purpose, and every sentence adds value. It avoids redundancy, such as not repeating schema details, and uses bullet points efficiently to highlight features without verbosity.

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 (1 param, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, but output schema exists), the description is complete. It explains input format, behavioral features, and output format (Markdown with metadata, body, references), leveraging the output schema to avoid detailing return values. No gaps remain for effective tool use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds rich semantics: resource_id must be a string in strict 'type:id' format, provides examples (e.g., 'statute:12345'), and specifies the ID source (search_korean_law output). This fully explains the parameter beyond the bare 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 verb ('Reads') and resource ('full content of a specific legal resource'), specifying it uses a Typed ID. It distinguishes from siblings like search_korean_law (which finds resources) by focusing on retrieving full text of a known resource, making the purpose specific and differentiated.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear context: use when you have a Typed ID from search_korean_law output to read full content. It implies this is for retrieval after identification, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives like explore_legal_chain for related resources, so it lacks full exclusions.

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/seo-jinseok/korean-law-mcp'

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