A
licenseA
qualityD
maintenanceProvides tools to search and retrieve nonprofit organization data and IRS filing summaries from ProPublica's Nonprofit Explorer, including side-by-side comparisons.
4
MIT
IRS 990 Nonprofit Data
by com.olyport
Server Details
Nonprofit lookup and IRS 990 filing data: revenue, assets, and compensation via ProPublica
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
MCP client
Glama
MCP server
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
100% free. Your data is private.
Tool Definition Quality
A4.1/5.0
Tool DescriptionsA
Average 4.1/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.
Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: search_nonprofits for finding EINs by name/keyword, get_nonprofit_details for comprehensive data on a specific EIN, and get_nonprofit_filings for filing history. No overlap.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case (search_nonprofits, get_nonprofit_details, get_nonprofit_filings). The verbs are clear actions and nouns specify the resource.
Tool Count4/5
With 3 tools, the set is small but appropriately scoped for querying IRS 990 data. It covers search, detailed lookups, and filing histories without unnecessary bloat.
Completeness4/5
The tool surface covers key operations: search, retrieve details, and get filing history. However, there is no tool to retrieve a specific filing document (e.g., raw PDF), which could be a minor gap for users needing full forms.
Available Tools
3 toolsget_nonprofit_detailsAInspect
Get detailed information about a nonprofit organization by EIN.
Returns comprehensive data from the organization's IRS 990 filings
including revenue, expenses, assets, executive compensation, and
filing history. Use search_nonprofits first to find the EIN.
Args:
ein: Employer Identification Number (e.g. '13-1837418' or '131837418').
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ein | Yes |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns data from IRS 990 filings, which implies a read-only operation with no destructive side effects. It does not mention authentication or rate limits, but for a data retrieval tool, the description adequately conveys behavior.
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 two efficient paragraphs. The first states purpose and lists contents; the second gives usage hint and parameter details. No unnecessary words, every sentence adds value.
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 the single parameter, clear output description, and presence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary information. The list of returned data types (revenue, expenses, etc.) provides sufficient context for the agent.
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 description coverage is 0%, but the description thoroughly explains the 'ein' parameter with format examples ('13-1837418' or '131837418'), adding value beyond the schema's empty description. This fully compensates for the lack of schema documentation.
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 the tool retrieves detailed nonprofit info by EIN, listing specific data categories (revenue, expenses, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'Use search_nonprofits first' and implying get_nonprofit_filings is for filings.
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?
It explicitly advises to use search_nonprofits first to find the EIN, providing a sequential workflow hint. It could be improved by explicitly stating when not to use this tool (e.g., for filing-specific queries use get_nonprofit_filings), but the current guidance is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_nonprofit_filingsAInspect
Get the filing history for a nonprofit organization.
Returns a list of all available IRS 990 filings for the organization,
including both filings with parsed data and those without. Useful for
tracking financial trends over time.
Args:
ein: Employer Identification Number (e.g. '13-1837418' or '131837418').
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ein | Yes |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Describes returning all available filings including parsed and unparsed, but no annotations provided. No mention of read-only, auth, or rate limits. Adequate but not comprehensive.
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?
Concise, front-loaded with purpose, then details and parameter section. Every sentence adds value.
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?
Simple tool with one parameter and output schema exists. Description covers what it does, what it returns, and parameter format. Complete for its complexity.
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?
Single parameter 'ein' explained with example format (dashed or plain). Schema coverage is 0%, so description adds essential meaning beyond the type string.
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?
Clear verb 'Get' and specific resource 'filing history for a nonprofit organization'. Distinguishes from siblings: get_nonprofit_details (likely details) and search_nonprofits (search).
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?
States it's 'useful for tracking financial trends over time' but no explicit when-not-to-use or comparison to siblings. Usage is implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_nonprofitsAInspect
Search for nonprofit organizations by name or keyword.
Searches the ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer database of IRS 990 filers.
Returns organization name, EIN, location, revenue, and tax status.
Args:
query: Search keywords (e.g. 'food bank', 'habitat for humanity').
state: Two-letter state abbreviation to filter by (e.g. 'CA', 'TX').
ntee_code: NTEE major category code (1-10). 1=Arts, 2=Education,
3=Environment, 4=Health, 5=Human Services, 6=International,
7=Public Benefit, 8=Religion, 9=Mutual Benefit, 10=Unknown.
c_code: IRS subsection code (e.g. 3 for 501(c)(3), 4 for 501(c)(4)).
page: Zero-indexed page number (25 results per page).
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| query | Yes | ||
| state | No | ||
| c_code | No | ||
| ntee_code | No |
Output Schema
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It does not indicate that the tool is read-only, safe, or idempotent. There is no mention of rate limits, authentication, or error behavior. The description only states searching and returning fields, leaving safety unknown.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness4/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concisely written in about 150 words with a clear front-loaded purpose and a structured Args list. Every sentence adds value, though the Args format could be slightly more integrated.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description covers parameters and general return fields but lacks details on pagination beyond the page parameter, error handling, or output schema structure. With an output schema available, return values are partially covered, but behavioral context is minimal.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, but the tool description includes a detailed 'Args' section explaining all five parameters, including default values, format for state, and enumeration for ntee_code. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema definitions.
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 starts with 'Search for nonprofit organizations by name or keyword', clearly stating the verb and resource. It specifies the ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer database and lists returned fields. Sibling tools get_nonprofit_details and get_nonprofit_filings handle distinct tasks, so this tool's purpose is well-differentiated.
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 implies usage for finding nonprofits but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over the siblings. It lacks guidance on alternatives, scope, or prerequisites. The Args section provides parameter details but no situational advice.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Servers
- Alicense-qualityAmaintenanceSearch and explore 1.8M+ US nonprofits, fetch Form 990 financials, and access IRS filing history via MCP.762Apache 2.0
- Alicense-qualityCmaintenanceEnables querying nonprofit organization data through the ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer API, providing access to financial and operational information without authentication.7MIT
- Alicense-qualityCmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that provides access to ProPublica's Nonprofit Explorer API, enabling AI models to search and analyze nonprofit organizations' Form 990 data for CRM integration and prospect research.1MIT