FEMA Disasters

get_individual_assistance

Get FEMA Individual and Households Program (IHP) assistance data.

Returns aggregated data on individual assistance provided to disaster
survivors including housing assistance and other needs assistance.
Data is aggregated at the county level per disaster.

Args:
    disaster_number: FEMA disaster number to filter by (e.g. 4737).
    state: Two-letter US state abbreviation (e.g. 'CA', 'TX').
    limit: Maximum number of records to return (default 25, max 1000).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`state`	No
`disaster_number`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that data is aggregated at the county level per disaster and includes housing and other needs assistance. It does not mention side effects, permissions, or rate limits, but as a data retrieval tool, the behavior is adequately transparent.

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 appropriately sized: a clear opening statement followed by a structured Args section. Every sentence adds value, with no fluff or redundancy.

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?

The description is complete for a simple retrieval tool. It explains the data type, aggregation level, and all parameters. An output schema exists, so return values need not be elaborated. The context and parameter details are sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description compensates fully by explaining each parameter with examples (e.g., disaster number 4737, state abbreviation 'CA', limit default/max). This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, which only lists types and defaults.

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 specifies the tool returns FEMA Individual and Households Program (IHP) assistance data, with a clear verb ('Get') and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning IHP and county-level aggregation, which sets it apart from public assistance or disaster declarations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions. However, the resource type (IHP assistance) makes the intended use clear, so usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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

All FEMA Disasters tools Inspect

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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource: declarations list, single declaration detail, and three separate assistance programs (HMGP, IHP, PA). The differentiation between declaration metadata and assistance data is clear, and the three assistance tools are distinguishable by their program-specific descriptions.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow the same verb_non ('get_') pattern with a clear noun descriptor, making the API predictable. There are no mixed conventions or vague verbs.

Tool Count5/5

With 5 tools, the count is well-scoped for a read-only FEMA data retrieval server. Each tool covers a major data category, and the count feels neither thin nor bloated.

Completeness4/5

The core domain of FEMA disasters is well-covered with declarations, detail, and the three main assistance programs. Minor gaps exist, such as no year filter on assistance queries or other FEMA datasets, but these do not severely hinder core workflows.

Resources

Need Help?