Puerto Rico Code

@pipeworx/puerto-rico-code

Puerto Rico statutes — "leyes" (acts) of the Puerto Rico Legislature, by citation and by topic, including LPRA citations like "33 LPRA 5001" for the two consolidated codes this pack has verified map cleanly to one act each. Spanish text as published, never machine-translated. Keyless.

Part of Pipeworx — an MCP gateway connecting AI agents to 1764+ live data sources. This is an independent, unofficial integration — not affiliated with, endorsed by, or published by the upstream provider.

Tools

• pr_statute(citation) — full text of a Puerto Rico statute article/section by citation. Accepts an LPRA citation ("33 LPRA 5001" is the Penal Code's Artículo 1; "31 LPRA 5311" is the Civil Code's Artículo 1), OR a direct act number alone ("55-2020") or with an article ("146-2012 Art. 92", "146-2012 Art. 93"). An act number with no article returns act-level metadata (title, years, "tipo", URL) rather than statute text. Returns the heading and full Spanish text as published, plus the source PDF URL and data_as_of.
• pr_search(query, limit?) — search by Spanish topic/keyword. Two tiers: REAL full-text search over the article bodies of the two LPRA-mapped codes (result_type: "lpra_section" — genuine body-text matches with their LPRA citation), plus a title/catchline search over OGP's full ~15,500-act catalog (result_type: "act") for everything else.

Auth

Keyless.

What this pack covers, and what it plainly does not

The commercially-sold, consolidated Leyes de Puerto Rico Anotadas (LPRA) (Westlaw/Lexis) is not free and this pack does not touch it. What IS free and government-published: the Oficina de Gerencia y Presupuesto's (OGP) "Biblioteca Virtual — Leyes de Referencia" (bvirtualogp.pr.gov), a public SharePoint 2013 site with no login wall, serving ~15,500 acts as PDFs, each either "Ley según enmendada" (OGP's own consolidated-with-every-amendment text, kept current) or "Ley original" (as enacted, for acts OGP has not consolidated).

LPRA has roughly 35 "títulos", most of which aggregate many different acts. This pack maps an LPRA citation to a section's text ONLY for the títulos it has individually verified by reading that act's own PDF — every "según enmendada" act OGP publishes annotates each of its own articles inline with its LPRA citation (confirmed live, e.g. "Artículo 92. — Asesinato. (33 L.P.R.A. § 5141)"), so the mapping is read off the source, never guessed. Currently mapped (LPRA_CODES in src/index.ts):

For every other título, pr_statute says lpra_title_not_mapped and names the mapped ones rather than guessing which act(s) cover it — call pr_statute with the specific act number instead if you know it (many acts, Ley 54-1989 "Ley para la Prevención e Intervención con la Violencia Doméstica" among them, carry the same inline LPRA annotation but are NOT in LPRA_CODES because a title can span several acts and this pack has not verified the full extent of that título's coverage — only an individual act lookup is offered for those).

Article numbers are not always a bare integer — "2.1-A", "3.10-A" are real (Ley 54-1989) alongside plain "92" (Ley 146-2012) — pr_statute accepts either shape in the citation argument's "Art." form.

Two REST hops, both anonymous SharePoint, no auth token

1. _api/web/lists/getbytitle('PDF')/items?$filter=FileLeafRef eq '146-2012.pdf' resolves a bare act number (e.g. "146-2012") straight to its metadata (Title, Number, Years, Tipo) and PDF path in ONE query, regardless of which topic subfolder OGP filed it under — confirmed the folder layout is NOT derivable from the act number alone (146-2012 is under PDF/Justicia/146-2012/146-2012.pdf, 55-2020 is a top-level PDF/55-2020.pdf), so this flat-list filter is the resolver rather than a guessed path. A handful of acts are also filed with an English translation under PDF/2-ingles/ or PDF/ingles/ — excluded; this pack never returns a translation.
2. A plain GET of that resolved path returns the PDF, decoded with shared/src/pdf-text.ts and sliced into per-article sections.

$filter on FileSystemObjectType is REJECTED by this list with an HTTP 500 ("Column 'FileSystemObjectType' does not exist" — confirmed live, 2026-10-09), even though the same field IS a valid $select — OGP's own category folders (one is literally titled "Municipios" and otherwise surfaces as a bare title-substring hit) are filtered out client-side instead, by requiring a non-null Tipo.

Page-footer noise, and why it matters for a long article

Every "según enmendada" PDF injects a repeating per-page footer into the literal text flow between pages: a quoted act-title banner immediately followed by "Rev. <date> www.ogp.pr.gov ... Página N de M". Confirmed live: 126 occurrences in the Penal Code's 125-page PDF before stripping, 2 left after (both outside any article body — the cover banner before Artículo 1 and the "verify latest revision" notice after the last article). Left in place, this noise lands mid-sentence inside any article whose text spans a page break — stripPageFooters in src/index.ts removes it before slicing. The quoted title and its "[Ley ..., según ...]" bracket are sometimes on the same line and sometimes split across a line break (acts cited by enactment date rather than "N-YYYY" shorthand, e.g. Ley 54-1989's "...Doméstica”\n[Ley 54 de 15 de agosto de 1989, según\n...") — the stripper tolerates either.

"Nota" annotations

A small number of LPRA sections carry TWO headings in the source: a "nota" (a note ABOUT the section, not its operative text) immediately followed by the real text — e.g. Ley 54-1989's "Artículo 1.1 ... (8 L.P.R.A. § 601 nota)" then "Artículo 1.2 ... (8 L.P.R.A. § 601)" right after. When resolving BY LPRA SECTION, the parser prefers the non-"nota" heading for the same section number.

Charset

The SharePoint REST JSON is served as application/json;odata=verbose;charset=utf-8 (confirmed live) and is decoded from the response's own declared charset, not assumed — a sibling pack in this family once turned every "§" into U+FFFD by assuming UTF-8 through a relay that actually served ISO-8859-1.

Data sources

• https://bvirtualogp.pr.gov/ogp/Bvirtual/leyesreferencia/_api/web/lists/getbytitle('PDF')/items — SharePoint REST over OGP's "Leyes de Referencia" PDF document library (~15,500 acts). $filter=FileLeafRef eq '<num>.pdf' resolves a bare act number; $filter=substringof('<query>',Title) is the act-title search tier.
• https://bvirtualogp.pr.gov/ogp/Bvirtual/leyesreferencia/PDF/... — the resolved PDF itself, one per act, text-extracted and sliced by article.

Confirmed from a throwaway wrangler dev --remote Worker on the prod Cloudflare account (2026-10-09) that bvirtualogp.pr.gov does NOT block Worker egress — byte-identical response to a direct curl for both the REST API and a PDF fetch, unlike oscn.net/le.utah.gov elsewhere in this pack family, so no egress relay is needed here.

Quick Start

Add to your MCP client (Claude Desktop, Cursor, Windsurf, etc.):

{  "mcpServers": {    "puerto-rico-code": {      "url": "https://gateway.pipeworx.io/puerto-rico-code/mcp"    }  }}

What this endpoint actually serves

tools/list at https://gateway.pipeworx.io/puerto-rico-code/mcp returns the tools in the table above plus the shared Pipeworx meta-tools — ask_pipeworx, discover_tools, search_within, remember/recall and the rest of the gateway-wide set. So the tool count you see is larger than this table: a single-pack endpoint currently lists roughly 30 shared tools alongside the pack's own. The connection's initialize response states its exact scope, and is the authoritative answer for a given day.

This is deliberate, not multiplexing by accident. The meta-tools are what let a scoped connection answer a question this pack does not cover — via ask_pipeworx, which routes across the whole catalog — without you adding a second MCP server. There is currently no way to mount a pack endpoint without them; if the extra schemas cost you more context than the routing is worth, connect to the full gateway once rather than to several pack endpoints.

Or connect to the full Pipeworx gateway to get every pack's tools listed directly, instead of just this one's:

{  "mcpServers": {    "pipeworx": {      "url": "https://gateway.pipeworx.io/mcp"    }  }}

Both URLs reach the same gateway and the same 1764+ data sources. The only difference is which pack's tools are listed directly; ask_pipeworx reaches all of them from either one.

No MCP client? Call it over HTTP

curl -X POST https://gateway.pipeworx.io/v1/tools/pr_statute \  -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \  -d '{"citation":"33 LPRA 5001"}'

No account needed for the first calls. Inspect any tool: GET https://gateway.pipeworx.io/v1/tools/pr_statute. Find one: POST https://gateway.pipeworx.io/v1/tools/search_packs with {"query":"..."}.

Standalone (no gateway account)

This package also runs as a local stdio MCP server — no Pipeworx account, no gateway round-trip:

{  "mcpServers": {    "puerto-rico-code": {      "command": "npx",      "args": ["-y", "@pipeworx/mcp-puerto-rico-code"]    }  }}

Or run it directly to confirm it starts:

npx -y @pipeworx/mcp-puerto-rico-code

It speaks MCP over stdin/stdout and answers initialize/tools/list/tools/call for only this pack's tools — none of the shared meta-tools the gateway connection above adds. Same source, same tools, no ask_pipeworx routing.

Using with ask_pipeworx

Instead of calling tools directly, you can ask questions in plain English — this works on the pack endpoint above as well as on the full gateway:

ask_pipeworx({ question: "your question about Puerto Rico Code data" })

The gateway picks the right tool and fills the arguments automatically.

More

• Docs and guides
• pipeworx.io

License

MIT