Skip to main content
Glama

List My Followed Bills

list_my_followed_bills
Read-onlyIdempotent

The bills the logged-in user follows in the Dapper platform, newest follow first. This is their own watchlist, not a search: use it for «¿qué proyectos estoy siguiendo?», «¿alguno de los que sigo se movió esta semana?», or to ground a briefing in what this person already cares about.

Rows are the same shape list_bills returns — title, authors, latest_state, dapper_url — plus followed_at and notify, so you can report movement without a second call per bill. meta.total is how many they follow in all.

This reads the watchlist; follow_bill and unfollow_bill change it, when this server lists them. A follow made there can take a few seconds to show up here.

Requires a signed-in session; an API key issued without a client_email has no watchlist to report and says so.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoRows per page (1-100, default 20). The response's `meta.has_more` and `meta.next_cursor` tell you whether there are more. `meta.total`, when it is not null, is the full count without paging; some lists return null rather than pay for a count. Raise the limit when you genuinely need a whole list in one call rather than the most relevant few.
cursorNoOpaque pagination cursor from a previous response's `meta.next_cursor`. Pass every other filter unchanged when paging. Only ever use a cursor this API handed you — never build one. With `q`, a cursor continues the keyword listing (`meta.mode: "keyword_fallback"`): relevance-ranked results are a single page of at most 20 rows and report `has_more: false`, so if you got one there is no next page to ask for, and a `limit` above 20 adds nothing to it. Narrow `q` instead of paging.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds critical context beyond annotations: it requires a signed-in session, an API key without a client_email yields no watchlist, and a follow made via follow_bill may take a few seconds to appear. These details materially affect correct invocation.

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 the core purpose and contrasts with alternatives immediately. Every sentence earns its place: it covers purpose, output shape, mutation consistency, auth requirements, and error behavior without redundancy or filler.

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 that an output schema exists, the description still helpfully summarizes return fields (title, authors, latest_state, dapper_url, followed_at, notify, meta.total) so an agent can plan without opening the output schema. It also covers auth prerequisites and eventual consistency, leaving no critical gaps for a read-only list tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the limit and cursor parameters are already fully documented with constraints, defaults, and pagination behavior. The description does not add further meaning about these parameters beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'The bills the logged-in user follows in the Dapper platform, newest follow first.' It explicitly distinguishes the tool from search and from list_bills by noting 'This is their own watchlist, not a search' and that rows match list_bills' shape. An agent can immediately tell what this tool returns and how it differs from siblings.

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 when-to-use guidance through sample user questions ('¿qué proyectos estoy siguiendo?', '¿alguno de los que sigo se movió esta semana?') and a purpose statement ('to ground a briefing in what this person already cares about'). It also names the mutation alternatives follow_bill and unfollow_bill, making the read-only role clear.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources