Dados Abertos Senado BR MCP

Resultado de veto

senado_resultado_veto

Read-onlyIdempotent

Obtém o resultado da apreciação de um veto presidencial. Retorna { codigo, tipo, resultado }, onde resultado é o objeto bruto da API (sem wrappers), com campos variáveis — tipicamente identificação do veto, situação por dispositivo (ex.: "Rejeitado"/"Mantido") e link do PDF do resultado nominal (PdfsResultadoVotacao). A API não fornece placar numérico (sim/não) aqui — o detalhamento nominal está no PDF; vem objeto vazio quando o veto ainda não foi votado e retorna erro se o codigo não existir. tipo define o que codigo representa: veto (código do veto, padrão), materia (código do projeto vetado) ou dispositivo (dispositivo de veto parcial) — as três chaves apontam para o mesmo veto. Obtenha o código via senado_vetos. Para listar vetos (não o resultado de um) use senado_vetos.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tipo`	No	Define a chave em codigo: veto = código do veto (padrão); materia = código do projeto vetado; dispositivo = dispositivo de veto parcial	veto
`codigo`	Yes	Código do veto, da matéria vetada ou do dispositivo — qual deles depende de `tipo`

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 11, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

Changed2 schema fields changedAug 31, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

Changed2 schema fields changedJul 8, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / codigo / description

Previous value: -"Código do veto, da matéria ou do dispositivo, conforme o tipo"New value: +"Código do veto, da matéria vetada ou do dispositivo — qual deles depende de `tipo`"

changedInput schema / properties / tipo / description

Previous value: -"veto = código do veto (padrão); materia = código do projeto vetado; dispositivo = dispositivo de veto parcial"New value: +"Define a chave em codigo: veto = código do veto (padrão); materia = código do projeto vetado; dispositivo = dispositivo de veto parcial"

Changed3 schema fields changedJun 28, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- addedInput schema / properties / codigo / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```
- changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -trueNew value: +{}
```

Changed1 schema field changedJun 13, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {},
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedJun 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent/non-destructive profile, yet the description adds substantial behavior: the result is the raw unwrapped API object, no numeric sim/não score is available here (nominal detail lives in the PDF), an empty object is returned for unvoted vetos, and an error occurs for a nonexistent codigo. This is exactly the edge-case disclosure annotations cannot convey.

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?

Well front-loaded: it opens with the action, then the return shape, then the edge cases, then the tipo semantics, then the sibling redirect. Some return-shape detail overlaps with the existing output schema, keeping it just short of fully wasteful-free, but each sentence still carries weight.

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 a 2-parameter read tool with an output schema, the definition is complete: it explains the return semantics, the three tipo modes, and the failure modes. No ambiguity remains for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the enum and the codigo definition are already documented, giving a baseline of 3. The description goes further by clarifying the drei-value interplay ('as três chaves apontam para o mesmo veto') and restating what codigo means under each tipo, adding real interpretive value.

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 ('Obtém o resultado da apreciação de um veto presidencial') and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling senado_vetos, which only lists vetos. An agent can tell the two apart without opening either schema.

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?

Names the alternative explicitly ('Para listar vetos use senado_vetos'), tells the agent where to obtain the required codigo ('Obtenha o código via senado_vetos'), and documents the boundary conditions (empty object when not yet voted, error when codigo does not exist). Full when-to-use and when-not-to-use routing.

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 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.