Skip to main content
Glama

Signal8

by ai.signal8

Get Donor Aggregates

get_donor_aggregates
Read-only

Get market-wide campaign-finance rollups across ALL tracked politicians for a cycle: total raised, top 10 individual donors, top 10 PACs, party/chamber/cycle splits, and a most-funded politician leaderboard. Use for "who are the biggest donors in 2024?" or "which party raised more?" type questions. For a single politician, use get_politician_donor_summary.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cycleNoElection cycle as 4-digit year (e.g. "2024"). Defaults to most recent cycle.
partyNoFilter by party: 'D', 'R', or 'I'
chamberNoFilter by chamber: 'senate' or 'house'

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds context about aggregate nature and included breakdowns. No contradictions, but could mention data recency or scope ('ALL tracked politicians') more precisely.

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?

Two sentences: first specifies purpose and outputs, second provides usage guidance and sibling differentiation. No extraneous information.

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 read-only nature, optional parameters with defaults, and clear output description, the definition fully equips an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description adds minimal extra semantic value beyond what schema already provides (e.g., default cycle behavior). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it retrieves market-wide campaign-finance rollups across all tracked politicians for a cycle, listing specific outputs (total raised, top donors, splits, leaderboard). It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tool get_politician_donor_summary.

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?

Provides explicit use cases ('who are the biggest donors in 2024?') and contrasts with alternative for single politician ('For a single politician, use get_politician_donor_summary').

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

All Signal8 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many tools have distinct purposes, but there are several groups of closely related tools (e.g., multiple insider trading and politician tools) that could cause confusion. Overall, an agent can generally distinguish tools, but the boundaries between some are fuzzy.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names use a consistent verb_noun pattern (get_, search_, screen_) with snake_case. This makes the tool set predictable and easy to navigate.

Tool Count1/5

With 91 tools, the server is far too large. The number of tools is excessive for a single MCP server, leading to cognitive overload and suggesting it should be split into multiple focused servers.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers an impressively wide domain including company data, insider trading, institutional holdings, political trading, and SEC filings. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no options or bonds), but the coverage is comprehensive for the stated purpose.

Resources