feeds

congress_trades

US Congress stock transactions from official Senate ePTR and House Clerk disclosures (public domain). Every record carries happened_at (transaction date), disclosed_at (filing date) and observed_at (when this pipeline first saw it). Because the STOCK Act permits ~45 days between trade and disclosure, disclosed_at is the field to use for point-in-time work. Senate data is parsed to ticker level; House filings are metadata only.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "congress_trades"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Substring match on member name
`paid`	No	true = request the pay-per-call (x402) quote or the live tier. Without a payment attached the call returns the x402 PaymentRequired object as an isError result; attach the signed payment at _meta["x402/payment"] (or the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header) and retry. Omit for the free, delayed tier.
`since`	No	Only transactions on/after this YYYY-MM-DD
`ticker`	No	Filter to one ticker, e.g. NVDA
`chamber`	No
`tickers`	No	Comma-separated tickers (max 100)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 29, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / paid

Added value: +{
+  "description": "true = request the pay-per-call (x402) quote or the live tier. Without a payment attached the call returns the x402 PaymentRequired object as an isError result; attach the signed payment at _meta[\"x402/payment\"] (or the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header) and retry. Omit for the free, delayed tier.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / tickers

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Comma-separated tickers (max 100)",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does it well: it discloses pipeline-observation semantics (observed_at), the trade-to-disclosure lag, and a critical coverage difference (Senate parsed to ticker level, House metadata only). It omits rate limits, pagination and the paid-tier mechanics, which live only in the schema.

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?

Three dense sentences, all load-bearing: provenance, temporal fields, then the one analytical caveat an agent would otherwise get wrong. Front-loaded and free of filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the three timestamp fields a caller will receive and flags the House/Senate granularity gap. Missing are return shape, volume/pagination expectations and tiering, so it is strong but not fully self-sufficient.

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 83%, so the schema already documents name/since/ticker/tickers/chamber/paid. The description's timestamp explanation concerns output fields rather than inputs and adds no syntax or format detail for the parameters themselves, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource (US Congress stock transactions) with its authoritative sources (Senate ePTR, House Clerk disclosures). It is unambiguous against siblings like insider_buys/insider_sells, though it never names an alternative to contrast with, so it falls just 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 Guidelines4/5

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

Gives real analytical guidance: disclosed_at is the field for point-in-time work because of the STOCK Act's ~45-day window, which steers the agent away from look-ahead bias. It stops short of explicit when-to-use-this-vs-sibling routing.

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

All feeds tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?