Lex — Temporal Luxembourg and EU Law

as_of

The state of one document as it stood on one date. Pure lookup, no ranking. mode=outline lists provisions without text and may be narrowed with anchors; mode=select returns only the named anchors' text; mode=full (default) returns the whole text. Every provision carries its own permalink and hash.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	Yes	ISO date YYYY-MM-DD
`mode`	No	full \| outline \| select (default full)
`work`	Yes	Work-level lex_id (publisher:workkey), version-level lex_id (version segment ignored), or verbatim publisher identifier with publisher supplied. Unknown document -> call search first.
`anchors`	No	optional comma-separated provision anchors for mode=outline; required for mode=select, e.g. art_1er,art_33
`language`	No	optional language code, e.g. fr
`publisher`	No	publisher id; required when work is not publisher-qualified
`version_key`	No	optional opaque key returned by timeline or an ambiguous_version choice

Schema Changelog

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

Changed3 schema fields changedAug 17, 2026

addedInput schema / allOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "if": {
+      "properties": {
+        "mode": {
+          "const": "select"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "mode"
+      ]
+    },
+    "then": {
+      "required": [
+        "anchors"
+      ]
+    }
+  }
+]

changedInput schema / properties / date / pattern

Previous value: -"^[0-9]{4}-[0-9]{2}-[0-9]{2}$"New value: +"^\\d{4}-(0[1-9]|1[0-2])-(0[1-9]|[12][0-9]|3[01])$"

addedInput schema / properties / version_key

Added value: +{
+  "description": "optional opaque key returned by timeline or an ambiguous_version choice",
+  "maxLength": 128,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed15 schema fields changedAug 11, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
addedInput schema / properties / anchors / maxLength
```
Added value: +1000
```
addedInput schema / properties / anchors / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```
addedInput schema / properties / date / maxLength
```
Added value: +10
```
addedInput schema / properties / date / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

addedInput schema / properties / date / pattern

Added value: +"^[0-9]{4}-[0-9]{2}-[0-9]{2}$"

addedInput schema / properties / language / maxLength
```
Added value: +16
```
addedInput schema / properties / language / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

addedInput schema / properties / mode / enum

Added value: +[
+  "full",
+  "outline",
+  "select"
+]

addedInput schema / properties / mode / maxLength
```
Added value: +64
```
addedInput schema / properties / mode / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

addedInput schema / properties / publisher

Added value: +{
+  "description": "publisher id; required when work is not publisher-qualified",
+  "maxLength": 64,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / work / description

Previous value: -"Work-level lex_id (publisher:workkey), version-level lex_id (version segment ignored), or verbatim publisher identifier. Unknown document -> call search first."New value: +"Work-level lex_id (publisher:workkey), version-level lex_id (version segment ignored), or verbatim publisher identifier with publisher supplied. Unknown document -> call search first."

addedInput schema / properties / work / maxLength
```
Added value: +1000
```
addedInput schema / properties / work / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

Changed1 schema field changedAug 8, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / anchors / description

Previous value: -"comma-separated provision anchors for mode=select, e.g. art_1er,art_33"New value: +"optional comma-separated provision anchors for mode=outline; required for mode=select, e.g. art_1er,art_33"

First observedAug 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states this is a 'Pure lookup' (no side effects), explains each mode (outline, select, full), and notes that every provision includes a permalink and hash. It does not mention error or edge cases, but for a read-only lookup this is reasonably transparent.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with a clear purpose statement, then detailed modes. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 7-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description covers the core behavior, all three modes, and output characteristics (permalkins/hash). It lacks explicit usage guidance and edge-case handling, but the schema fills parameter details. This is a solid, nearly complete description.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds context about how mode and anchors interact (outline can be narrowed with anchors; select returns named anchors' text), which helps understanding. However, this overlaps with the schema's parameter descriptions and does not add significantly new meaning.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool provides 'the state of one document as it stood on one date' and explicitly notes 'Pure lookup, no ranking,' which distinguishes it from search. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling historical tools like in_force_on or timeline, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives almost no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It only says 'Pure lookup, no ranking,' which vaguely implies not for ranking, but does not mention when to prefer as_of over in_force_on, timeline, or changes_in_period. The schema's 'Unknown document -> call search first' is useful but not part of the description itself.

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

All Lex — Temporal Luxembourg and EU Law 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

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but timeline and article_history both cover historical versions, and as_of and in_force_on both relate to state on a date. Descriptions are detailed enough to resolve overlap, so confusion is limited.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are lowercase with underscores, but they mix noun forms (coverage, provenance), verb forms (search, diff), and prepositional phrases (as_of, in_force_on, changes_in_period). This is readable but lacks a consistent pattern like verb_noun.

Tool Count5/5

Ten tools is well within the ideal range for a specialized legal research server. Each tool addresses a distinct aspect of temporal legal queries, and none feel redundant or superfluous.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers search, retrieval, history, citations, coverage gaps, and provenance. It supports both document-level and corpus-level temporal analysis, making it comprehensive for the stated domain of Luxembourg and EU law research.

as_of

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

TDQS

Resources