Moltline RegClock

Compute Deadlines Multi

compute_deadlines_multi

Read-onlyIdempotent

One merged timeline across several regimes for the same incident. PREMIUM (license).

Typical input {"regimes": [{"regime": "eu_nis2"}, {"regime": "eu_gdpr"}, {"regime": "eu_dora", "entity_class": "credit_institution"}], "awareness_at": "2026-09-14T09:30:00+02:00", "country": "DE"} returns {"timeline": [rows sorted by due_at, each tagged with regime], "first_due": {...}, "per_regime": {...}}. Each entry may carry its own event_type and entity_class; the anchors and flags are shared. Use when one incident triggers several regimes and the agent needs a single ordered list. Not for one regime: compute_deadlines is free. Errors: on invalid, missing, or malformed input this tool never raises a protocol error — it returns {"error": ""} (for example {"error": "regimes must be a non-empty list of "}). Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`flags`	No	condition answers shared by all regimes (see compute_deadlines).
`subdiv`	No	optional subdivision code for the holiday calendar.
`country`	No	ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code for the public-holiday calendar.
`regimes`	Yes	list of {"regime": id, "event_type"?: ..., "entity_class"?: ...} (1-10 entries).
`submitted`	No	actual submission times keyed by "regime/obligation" or obligation id.
`awareness_at`	Yes	when the entity became aware, ISO 8601 with a UTC offset.
`entity_class`	No	default entity class for entries that do not set their own.
`discovery_date`	No	HIPAA discovery date (defaults to the awareness date).
`classification_at`	No	DORA classification instant.
`measure_available_at`	No	CRA corrective-measure instant.
`materiality_determined_at`	No	SEC materiality determination instant.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Although annotations already mark read-only and idempotent, the description adds crucial error behavior: invalid input never raises a protocol error but returns {'error': ...}, making retry safe. It also discloses that the tool is PREMIUM/licensed and sketches the return shape.

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 front-loaded with purpose, then example, then usage and error behavior, with no filler. Every sentence earns its place, including the license note and retry guarantee.

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?

For an 11-parameter nested tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description supplies the missing context: when to use it, how it differs from the free sibling, what errors look like, and high-level output shape. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by showing a typical input object and clarifying that per-entry event_type/entity_class are overrides while anchors and flags are shared across regimes.

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 opening line names the exact deliverable: one merged timeline across several regimes for the same incident. It also differentiates from the single-regime sibling by saying 'Not for one regime: compute_deadlines is free.'

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 explicitly states the trigger condition ('Use when one incident triggers several regimes and the agent needs a single ordered list') and the exclusion ('Not for one regime: compute_deadlines is free'). This gives the agent a clear routing rule among siblings.

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

All Moltline RegClock tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct stage of the incident-reporting workflow: classify_event qualifies the incident, compute_deadlines and compute_deadlines_multi produce deadlines, deadline_status monitors them, explain_rule cites the underlying rule, and timeline_export and validate_report handle output and pre-submission checks. No two tools are plausible substitutes; the single vs. multi-regime split between the two deadline tools is explicitly described.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most action tools follow a verb_noun pattern (classify_event, compute_deadlines, explain_rule, list_regimes, validate_report), but three tools use noun_noun or reversed forms (deadline_status, holiday_calendar, timeline_export). The convention is readable but not uniform, making it a mixed pattern rather than a consistent one.

Tool Count5/5

Nine tools is a well-scoped set for a regulatory deadline engine. Each tool maps to a necessary capability—discovery, classification, computation, status, explanation, calendar data, export, and validation—without redundant or filler entries.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full lifecycle: discover regimes, classify an incident, compute single or multi-regime deadlines, assess their status, inspect the statutory rule, export to calendar/CSV, and validate a draft report. Holiday and regime metadata tools fill supporting gaps, leaving no obvious dead-end for the stated purpose.

Resources

Need Help?