Skip to main content
Glama

Legislation Uk

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Entity Profile

entity_profile
Read-onlyIdempotent

"Tell me about X" / "research Acme" / "brief me on Tesla" / "what does Apple do" / "company profile for Microsoft" / "give me the rundown on NVDA" / "everything you know about $TICKER" — full cross-source profile of a US public company in ONE parallel call. ALWAYS PREFER over chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups when the user asks for a holistic view. Fans out across SEC EDGAR, XBRL, USPTO patents, federal contracts (USAspending), FDA-licensed biologics (Purple Book), H-1B hiring (DOL LCA), news and GLEIF, and returns: cik + company_name (+ resolved_from/resolved_to when value was a name); recent_filings (up to 5 with pipeworx://edgar/company/{cik}/filings/{accession} URIs); fundamentals (LATEST 10-K Revenues + NetIncomeLoss + Cash, sorted period_end DESC); patents (USPTO PatentsView API sunset May 2025 — soft-fails until reactivated); federal_contracts (USAspending awards where the company is the recipient); fda_products (FDA-licensed biologics — vaccines, cell/gene therapies — from the Purple Book; a company with only small-molecule/generic drugs will show none here, that is expected, not a failure); hiring (H-1B sponsorship volume + salary range from DOL LCA filings); recent news mentions via GDELT→GNews fallback; LEI via GLEIF. sources_used / sources_failed say which of these actually returned data for THIS company — an empty section is a real "no data", not a bug. Pass a ticker ("AAPL"), zero-padded CIK ("0000320193"), OR a company name ("Moderna") — names now resolve via SEC EDGAR's company-name match; a private company (no CIK/ticker) returns resolved:false with an explicit notes line, not a bare failure. type accepts "company" or "ticker" interchangeably — both take the same value shapes above.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYes"company" or "ticker" — both are accepted and behave identically; `value` can be a ticker, CIK, or company name either way. person/place coming soon.
valueYesTicker (e.g., "AAPL"), zero-padded CIK (e.g., "0000320193"), or company name (e.g., "Moderna") — names resolve via SEC EDGAR company-name match.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / description
      Previous value: -"Entity type. Only \"company\" supported today; person/place coming soon."New value: +"\"company\" or \"ticker\" — both are accepted and behave identically; `value` can be a ticker, CIK, or company name either way. person/place coming soon."
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "company"
-]New value: +[
+  "company",
+  "ticker"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / value / description
      Previous value: -"Ticker (e.g., \"AAPL\") or zero-padded CIK (e.g., \"0000320193\"). Names not supported — use resolve_entity first if you only have a name."New value: +"Ticker (e.g., \"AAPL\"), zero-padded CIK (e.g., \"0000320193\"), or company name (e.g., \"Moderna\") — names resolve via SEC EDGAR company-name match."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond those hints: it lists the parallel fan-out sources, names the USPTO sunset soft-fail, describes the GDELT→GNews fallback, and explains the semantics of sources_used/sources_failed. No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is long but earns its length: each clause adds behavioral or return-value information necessary for correct use. It is front-loaded with example queries and the core value proposition before the detailed field enumeration. It could be slightly tightened, but is well organized and not redundant.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the full burden of explaining return values, and it does so thoroughly: it enumerates every returned field with caveats, describes fallback behavior, explains failure semantics, and specifies accepted input shapes. For a complex multi-source profile tool, this is as complete as an agent needs.

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 the baseline is 3; the description earns a 4 by adding meaningful nuances beyond the schema: it explicitly says the two type values are interchangeable, shows zero-padded CIK and ticker examples, and notes that names resolve via SEC EDGAR's company-name match. This helps an agent choose and format values correctly.

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 states the tool's function as a 'full cross-source profile of a US public company in ONE parallel call' and pairs it with concrete user phrasings ('Tell me about X', 'brief me on Tesla'). It clearly differentiates from the sibling list by naming the exact lookups it replaces (SEC/XBRL/news) and specifying its target resource (US public companies).

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 gives explicit routing guidance: 'ALWAYS PREFER over chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups when the user asks for a holistic view.' It also states when resolution fails (private companies return resolved:false) and clarifies that empty sections are real 'no data', not bugs, preventing misinterpretation.

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

All Legislation Uk toolsInspect
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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The four legislation tools are clearly distinct, but the set as a whole is confusing: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are explicitly identical right now, and entity_profile, compare_entities, recent_changes, validate_claim, and ask_pipeworx_grounded have overlapping research/verification purposes. The 31 non-legislation tools also create constant ambiguity about which tool to pick for a UK law question.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names are uniformly lowercase snake_case and mostly follow recognizable verb-led or prefixed patterns (get_legislation, search_legislation, ask_pipeworx, polymarket_*). Minor deviations like entity_profile, bet_research, and recent_changes are noun-phrase style rather than verb_noun, but there is no camelCase mixing or chaotic convention.

Tool Count1/5

A server named 'Legislation Uk' has 35 tools, only 4 of which relate to UK legislation; the rest are Pipeworx data-platform, prediction-market, memory, and subscription utilities. This is an extreme mismatch between the tool count and the server's apparent purpose.

Completeness4/5

The UK legislation portion covers the core read workflow well: search_legislation finds a statute, get_legislation returns metadata, and get_legislation_text/get_legislation_section provide full or section-level text with versioning. Minor gaps exist, such as no dedicated amendment-history or cross-version diff tool, but there are no dead ends for typical lookups.

Resources