get_bill_detailsGet detailed information about a specific bill including sponsor, cosponsors, committees, actions, and policy area.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| billId | Yes | Bill identifier in congress-type-number format (e.g., "119-hr-1" for H.R.1 in 119th Congress) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true (safe read) and openWorldHint=true (results may vary). Description adds that it returns sponsor, cosponsors, etc., but does not disclose rate limits, data freshness, or whether all bills are covered. With annotations handling the safety profile, the description adds modest value.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence packed with relevant content, no filler, front-loaded with verb and resource.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With one parameter, excellent schema, and annotations present, the description lists key fields returned. However, without an output schema, the description could more fully hint at the return structure (e.g., that it's a JSON object). Still, it's adequate for an agent to understand the tool's purpose.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with a single parameter billId that has a clear format description. The description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description uses specific verb 'Get detailed information' and identifies the resource as 'a specific bill' with listed fields (sponsor, cosponsors, committees, actions, policy area). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_legislation which find bills rather than retrieve details.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Description implies use when you already know a specific bill ID and want full details, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like search_legislation for finding bills. No guidance on prerequisites or context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clear, specific purpose with detailed descriptions that differentiate them. Prefix patterns like get_district_, search_, analyze_, get_, etc., help an agent easily identify the correct tool for a task.
All tool names use a consistent verb_noun or verb_noun_noun pattern with underscores. The naming convention is uniform across the entire set, with no mixing of styles or ambiguous verbs.
With 47 tools, the count is high but justified by the broad scope of civic data analysis. While some agents might find the sheer number overwhelming, the tools are organized into clear categories (district profiles, searches, analyses) that make navigation feasible.
The toolset covers an impressively wide range of domains: legislation, representatives, districts, voting, committees, campaign finance, lobbying, federal spending, regulations, environment, energy, healthcare, housing, disaster, banking, consumer complaints, crime, vehicles, and more. There are no obvious missing operations for a civic data platform.