Skip to main content
Glama

Dados Abertos Senado BR MCP

by io.github.SidneyBissoli

Vetos presidenciais

senado_vetos
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lista vetos presidenciais em apreciação pelo Congresso Nacional, por ano ou por status de tramitação. Retorna { count, total, aviso?, vetos }, com cada veto trazendo codigo, identificacao, ementa, emTramitacao, materiaVetada, tipo (total/parcial), assunto e dataLimiteVotacao (prazo de sobrestamento de pauta). limite controla o corte (padrão 100; aviso indica truncagem). Informe ano OU status (tramitando/antes-rcn/encerrados). Para o resultado da votação de um veto use senado_resultado_veto.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
anoNoVetos do ano informado
limiteNoMáximo de resultados (padrão: 100)
statusNotramitando = pós-RCN 1/2013 em tramitação (padrão); antes-rcn = anteriores à RCN; encerrados = tramitação encerrada

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?

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only/idempotent, and the description adds concrete behavioral details: the exact response envelope, truncation signaling via 'aviso', default limit of 100, meaning of 'dataLimiteVotacao', and status category semantics. This makes the tool's runtime behavior clear beyond the 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?

The description is dense but compact: purpose, response shape, parameter guidance, and sibling routing each get one sentence, front-loaded in order of importance. No filler or repetition of schema details beyond what is needed for safe invocation.

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?

It is complete for a read-only lookup with zero required parameters: it documents the response envelope, per-item fields, default and cap for 'limite', status options, and the related vote-result tool. Even with the output schema present, the description leaves no significant calling ambiguity.

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?

The input schema already covers all three parameters at 100%, so 3 is the baseline. The description adds value by imposing the ano-OR-status relationship, clarifying that 'limite' controls truncation and that 'aviso' signals it, and expanding status meanings with the RCN reference.

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 ('Lista'), resource ('vetos presidenciais em apreciação pelo Congresso Nacional'), and the two supported query dimensions (ano/status). It also routes the related but distinct vote-result lookup to sibling senado_resultado_veto, preventing confusion.

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 states to provide 'ano OU status', enumerates the valid status values, and explains the default behavior. The final sentence gives an explicit when-not-to-use pointer to senado_resultado_veto for vote-result lookups.

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