Skip to main content
Glama

Dados Abertos Senado BR MCP

by io.github.SidneyBissoli

Remuneração de servidores

senado_remuneracoes_servidores
Read-onlyIdempotent

Remunerações dos servidores do Senado em ano/mes de referência (a partir de 2013). Para perguntas de maior/menor/média/mediana/ranking ('quem ganhou mais em junho/2026', 'remuneração média') use estatisticas=true: computa min/máx/média/mediana/desvio/percentis sobre a folha INTEIRA e devolve top/bottom (padrão 10) identificados por nome (com idInternoFolha só para desambiguar homônimos, não para citar) — o modo resumo/detalhe só vê uma fatia e não acha o extremo real. Cada percentil vem com um rotulo legível e a coluna analisada tem rótulo legível em campoAnalisado. campo escolhe a verba analisada (padrão: remuneração bruta); consolidarPorServidor (padrão true) soma as linhas Normal+Suplementar da mesma pessoa antes das estatísticas; agruparPor='tipoFolha' devolve estatísticas por grupo (implica não-consolidado). Sem estatisticas: modo=resumo (padrão) retorna { ano, mes, totalRegistros, resumo[] } agregado por tipoFolha; modo=detalhe retorna { count, total, remuneracoes[] } com a composição individual, limitada por limite (padrão 50, máx 500). Filtros nome/tipoFolha aplicam antes de tudo. Para o cadastro de servidores use senado_servidores.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
anoYesAno de referência
mesYesMês de referência
modoNoresumo = totais por tipo de folha (padrão); detalhe = composição individual. Ignorado quando estatisticas=trueresumo
nomeNoNome do servidor (busca parcial)
topNNoTamanho das listas top/bottom quando estatisticas=true (padrão: 10, máx: 100)
campoNoVerba analisada quando estatisticas=true (padrão: remuneração bruta). O resultado traz o rótulo legível em campoAnalisado.bruto
limiteNoMáximo de linhas no modo detalhe (padrão: 50)
tipoFolhaNoFiltrar por tipo de folha (busca parcial)
agruparPorNoQuando estatisticas=true, devolve estatísticas por grupo (só `tipoFolha`); implica dados por linha (não consolidados)
estatisticasNoComputa estatísticas (min/máx/média/mediana/percentis) + ranking top/bottom sobre a folha inteira. Use para 'quem ganhou mais/menos', 'média', 'ranking'
consolidarPorServidorNoSoma as linhas (Normal+Suplementar) do mesmo servidor antes das estatísticas (padrão: true). Ignorado — forçado a false — quando agruparPor está definido

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only/idempotent annotations, it discloses behavior: statistics run over the entire payroll, top/bottom defaults, consolidation of Normal+Suplementar lines, agruparPor forcing non-consolidation, filters applied before anything else, and idInternoFolha only for disambiguating homonyms. This is substantive behavioral context the annotations do not provide.

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 long but tightly organized: main purpose first, then the estatisticas branch, then the non-estatisticas modes, then filters and the sibling pointer. Each clause maps to a parameter or behavioral trait, so there is no 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?

For an 11-parameter tool with a rich output schema, the description covers all major modes, defaults, limits, grouping behavior, consolidation, and error-prone edge cases (e.g., homonyms, extremes hidden by slices). Nothing an agent needs to select and invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description enriches the parameters materially: it explains what estatisticas computes and returns, why consolidarPorServidor matters before statistics, that agruparPor implies non-consolidated data, and that campo's result carries a readable label in campoAnalisado. These semantics go well beyond the schema.

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 opens with a specific resource ('Remunerações dos servidores do Senado') and scopes it by month/year from 2013, and it names the sibling tool senado_servidores for the registry, so an agent can tell which tool answers a pay question. It also distinguishes the estatisticas mode from resumo/detalhe by what each computes.

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?

It gives explicit routing rules: use estatisticas=true for 'maior/menor/média/mediana/ranking' and explains why resumo/detalhe won't find the true extreme. It also points to senado_servidores for employee registration, so when-to-use and alternatives are explicit.

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

All Dados Abertos Senado BR MCP toolsInspect
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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools perform overlapping functions (e.g., senado_buscar_materias vs senado_search_processos, senado_contratos vs senado_contratacoes_lista, and three e-cidadania consultation tools). Although descriptions are detailed, an agent can easily select the wrong one without deep inspection.

Naming Consistency3/5

All tools share the 'senado_' prefix, but the pattern is inconsistent: some use Portuguese verbs (buscar, listar, obter), others English 'search', and some are bare nouns (senado_ceaps, senado_mesa, senado_vetos). This mixed convention reduces predictability.

Tool Count2/5

67 tools is far above the 25 threshold, indicating an overgrown surface. While each tool may serve a niche endpoint, the sheer number makes it difficult for an agent to choose efficiently, and many tools could be consolidated.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers nearly every aspect of Senate open data (legislative, senatorial, committee, administrative, financial, e-cidadania) with list/detail/searches. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct consolidated contract search, but most workflows can be achieved.

Resources