vote.direct

Status of one election or survey

get_election

Read-onlyIdempotent

One election or survey in the connected account, as it is saved now: the schedule in its time zone, every question with its type, seats and options (in the words create_election_draft takes), the settings, the voter list as counts, ballots cast, turnout and quorum, and links. For a DRAFT election it also reports what still blocks publishing, what is worth checking, the exact price the publish step would charge, and who pays it (free, plan, prepaid balance, or card at the finish link). Per-question results are on the election page link; this tool reports counts only, never a voter's name, email or phone number.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "election": "<election>"
    },
    "name": "get_election"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`election`	Yes	The election's id or slug, from list_elections or create_election_draft.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedSep 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), yet the description adds real value beyond them: for drafts it discloses publishing blockers, price and payer attribution, and it explicitly states a privacy boundary ('counts only, never a voter's name, email or phone number') plus where per-question results live. These are behavioral limits an annotations block cannot express.

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?

Purpose and scope are front-loaded in the first clause, and the draft and privacy details are appended in logical order. The first sentence is a long multi-item run-on, which slightly impairs scanability, but nearly every clause carries information an agent needs; there is little 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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the return-value burden, and it does: schedule/time zone, questions with type, seats and options, settings, voter counts, ballots, turnout, quorum, links, plus the draft-only blockers/price/payer block. For a read-only single-resource fetch it is appropriately complete.

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?

With one parameter and 100% schema description coverage, the schema already carries the meaning ('id or slug, from list_elections or create_election_draft'). The description's only parameter-adjacent note is that question options are expressed 'in the words create_election_draft takes', which concerns returned data, not the input. Baseline 3 applies.

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+resource (one election or survey) and scope ('one', 'as it is saved now'), which implicitly contrasts with the sibling list_elections. It also enumerates what the resource view contains, so an agent can tell exactly what this returns versus a bulk listing tool.

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?

Usage is implied by 'one election ... as it is saved now' and by naming list_elections/create_election_draft as the id source, and it explains draft-specific extras. However, it never explicitly says when to prefer this over siblings like get_election_readiness or get_election_price, even though it duplicates parts of their territory (blockers, price). No alternatives or exclusions are named.

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

All vote.direct 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?