Skip to main content
Glama
srhtdmrkl

osha-recordkeeping-mcp

by srhtdmrkl

Route a Case to the Right Establishment Log (29 CFR 1904.30)

osha_route_to_establishment_log
Read-onlyIdempotent

Determines which establishment's OSHA 300 Log a recordable case belongs on—following the place of injury, not the employee's home site. Also flags if the destination needs its own log and central recordkeeping deadlines.

Instructions

Decide WHICH establishment's OSHA 300 Log a recordable case belongs on — the last question about an individual incident, and one multi-site employers routinely get backwards. Under 1904.30(b)(4) the case follows the PLACE, not the person: an injury occurring at one of the employer's establishments is recorded on THAT establishment's log even when the employee normally works elsewhere, while an injury away from all of them (a customer site, in transit, remote work) goes on the log of the establishment where the employee normally works. Also reports whether the destination needs its own log — required for establishments expected to operate a year or longer (1904.30(a)), optional for short-term sites which may share a combined log (b)(1) — and, when records are kept centrally, the 7-calendar-day transmission deadline and the two conditions central recordkeeping depends on (b)(2)). Reference and triage only — not legal advice.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
records_kept_centrallyNoAre the establishment's records kept at headquarters or another central location? Permitted only on the two conditions in 1904.30(b)(2).
date_information_receivedNoISO 8601 date the employer received information that a recordable case occurred. Used with central recordkeeping to compute the 7-calendar-day transmission deadline (1904.30(b)(2)(i)).
employee_was_telecommuting_from_homeNoWas the employee working from home at the time? A home is NEVER a business establishment and needs no separate 300 Log (1904.46(3)) — the case goes on the log of the establishment the telecommuter is linked to under 1904.30(b)(3). Pass false for occurred_at_one_of_your_establishments in this case.
occurred_at_one_of_your_establishmentsYesDid the injury or illness occur AT one of the employer's own establishments? True even if it is not the employee's usual site. False for a customer site, in transit, or working from home. An establishment is a single physical location where business is conducted (1904.46); for mobile work — construction, transportation, utilities — it is the office, terminal or station that supervises the activity or is the base for it.
destination_expected_to_operate_a_year_or_longerNoIs the establishment whose log will carry the case expected to be in operation for a year or longer? If not, no separate log is required — its cases may go on a combined short-term log, optionally per division or geographic region (1904.30(a), (b)(1)).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindYes
valueYes
cfr_citeYes
source_urlYes
last_verifiedYes
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and the description fully aligns with these. It goes beyond annotations by elaborating the regulatory framework and edge cases (e.g., telecommuting, mobile work, short-term establishments), providing transparency about the tool's decision-making behavior without contradiction. No side effects are implied, consistent with read-only nature.

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?

While lengthy, the description is well-structured and information-dense. It front-loads the core purpose and then systematically explains the decision logic, referencing specific regulations and edge cases. Every sentence adds value, and the regulatory citations (1904.30(a), (b)(1)-(4), 1904.46) are precise. No redundancy or filler is present.

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 OSHA regulations, the description is remarkably complete. It covers the main rule (place of injury), exceptions (telecommuting, mobile work), and ancillary considerations (short-term establishments, central recordkeeping deadlines). Since an output schema exists, the lack of explicit return-value description is acceptable. The description equips an agent to make the correct routing decision without ambiguity.

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 coverage is 100% with all 5 parameters described in detail. The description adds semantic depth by explaining the significance of each parameter (e.g., 'occurred_at_one_of_your_establishments' definition includes mobile work nuances, and 'employee_was_telecommuting_from_home' clarifies that a home is never an establishment). This exceeds the schema's basic descriptions and provides the rationale for parameter values.

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's purpose: to decide which establishment's OSHA 300 Log a recordable case belongs on. It uses a specific verb ('Decide') and a specific resource ('establishment's OSHA 300 Log'), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like check_recordkeeping_obligation and determine_recording_employer by focusing on the final routing decision.

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 positions this as 'the last question about an individual incident,' making clear it is used after other recordability steps. It also provides detailed regulatory context (1904.30(b)(4)) and explains the decision logic, effectively guiding when to use this tool versus alternatives. The 'last question' phrasing implies it's the final step in a sequence, which is sufficient for routing.

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/srhtdmrkl/osha-recordkeeping-mcp'

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