Skip to main content
Glama

Dados Abertos Senado BR MCP

by io.github.SidneyBissoli

Votações de um senador

senado_votacoes_senador
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lista as votações nominais de um senador, mostrando como votou em cada matéria. Retorna { periodo, count, votos }, cada voto com codigoVotacao, data, materia, descricao, voto e resultado, ordenados da mais recente para a mais antiga. Sem período usa o ano corrente; informe ano ou o par dataInicio/dataFim (YYYYMMDD). Requer codigoSenador (obtenha via senado_listar_senadores); para detalhes de uma votação específica use senado_obter_votacao.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
anoNoAno das votações
dataFimNoData fim (YYYYMMDD)
dataInicioNoData início (YYYYMMDD)
codigoSenadorYesCódigo único do senador

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?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive, and the description adds helpful behavioral specifics: output shape {periodo, count, votos}, field list, chronological order, and default to the current year. No contradictions 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?

Three dense sentences: purpose, return shape/ordering, and usage rules. The main action is front-loaded, and no sentence is redundant.

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?

With an output schema present, return values are already covered, and the description still adds ordering, defaults, and cross-tool references. For a list tool with strong annotations, nothing needed to 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the description enriches it by explaining the mutual exclusivity of ano vs dataInicio/dataFim, the YYYYMMDD format, the default current-year behavior, and the origin of codigoSenador. This significantly exceeds the schema's bare parameter labels.

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 'Lista as votações nominais de um senador, mostrando como votou em cada matéria', which specifies the exact action and resource, and differentiates from senado_obter_votacao. The scope is unambiguous.

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 that codigoSenador is required and how to obtain it via senado_listar_senadores, and directs users needing details of a specific vote to senado_obter_votacao. It also clarifies the period default and alternatives (ano vs date range).

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