Skip to main content
Glama

Dados Abertos Senado BR MCP

by io.github.SidneyBissoli

Pesquisar votações

senado_search_votacoes
Read-onlyIdempotent

Busca e lista votações do plenário combinando critérios opcionais. Janela temporal: informe dias (últimos N dias, 1-365) para atividade recente, OU dataInicio/dataFim (YYYYMMDD) para um período arbitrário — para um ano inteiro use dataInicio: "AAAA0101" e dataFim: "AAAA1231". Demais filtros: idProcesso, codigoMateria, sigla/numero/ano da matéria, codigoParlamentar e siglaVotoParlamentar. Retorna { count, votacoes } ordenadas da mais recente para a mais antiga; cada item traz codigoSessao, data, materia, codigoMateria, resultado e placar (totalSim/totalNao/totalAbstencao), sem votos nominais. Use senado_obter_votacao com o codigoSessao para os votos de cada senador.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
anoNoAno da matéria
diasNoJanela: votações dos últimos N dias (ignorado se dataInicio/dataFim forem informados)
siglaNoSigla do tipo de matéria
numeroNoNúmero da matéria
dataFimNoData fim (YYYYMMDD)
dataInicioNoData início (YYYYMMDD)
idProcessoNoID do processo legislativo
codigoMateriaNoCódigo da matéria
codigoParlamentarNoCódigo do parlamentar
siglaVotoParlamentarNoTipo de voto do parlamentar

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint), the description reveals the return shape ({ count, votacoes }), ordering (most recent first), the absence of nominal votes, and the precedence rule that 'dias' is ignored when date range is provided. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Five dense sentences carry the purpose, time-window rules, other filters, return format, and a cross-reference. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and contains 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 a tool with 10 optional parameters and a rich output schema, the description covers all necessary invocation knowledge: filter combinations, date formats and precedence, ordering, returned fields, and the companion tool for detailed votes. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to spell out return values, yet it still does.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context by grouping matter filters (sigla/numero/ano), explaining the OR relationship between time-window parameters, and giving a concrete annual date example.

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 verb and resource: 'Busca e lista votações do plenário' (searches and lists plenary votes), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling committee or senator vote tools. It also names senado_obter_votacao as the detail counterpart, reinforcing the scope of this list tool.

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 explicitly details the mutually exclusive time-window options ('dias' vs 'dataInicio'/'dataFim') and even provides a full-year example. It routes the agent to senado_obter_votacao when per-senator votes are needed and notes that nominal votes are not returned here.

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