Skip to main content
Glama

congressgov-mcp-server

Congress.gov Committee Lookup

congressgov_committee_lookup
Read-onlyIdempotent

Browse congressional committees and their legislation, reports, and nominations. Committee codes follow the pattern chamber-prefix (h/s/j) + abbreviation + 2-digit number — use 'list' (with optional 'filter' for name→code resolution) to discover codes, then 'get' or drill into 'bills', 'reports', or 'nominations' ('nominations' is Senate-only). 'get' and sub-resources only need committeeCode (chamber is inferred from the prefix); pass chamber explicitly to override. The 'bills' sub-resource defaults to 'recent' order (newest update-date first); pass order='oldest' for ascending update-date order. Upstream omits bill titles from the 'bills' sub-resource — rows carry only {congress, billType, billNumber, actionDate, relationshipType, url}; chain 'congressgov_bill_lookup get' per row to retrieve titles and policy area.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoResults per page (1-250).
orderNoSort order for the 'bills' sub-resource. 'recent' (default) returns newest update-date first; 'oldest' returns ascending update-date order. Ignored by other operations.recent
filterNoFilter committee-list results by name (e.g., 'transportation', 'armed services'). Only meaningful for 'list'; fuzzy-matched rows are labeled approximate.
offsetNoPagination offset.
chamberNoChamber filter for 'list', or override for 'get' and sub-resources (otherwise inferred from committeeCode prefix).
congressNoCongress number.
operationYesWhich data to retrieve.
committeeCodeNoCommittee system code, e.g. 'hsju00'. Required for 'get' and sub-resources. Codes are letters + a 2-digit suffix and are matched case-insensitively. Any other non-blank value is treated as a committee name and resolved automatically — single-word names ('Judiciary') included — or use operation:'list' with filter to browse.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoResult rows. Per-tool item shape is rendered in the markdown body.
errorNoPresent when the call failed. Absent on success.
noticeNoGuidance when results are empty, a page is past the end, or a caveat applies.
committeeNoDynamic upstream JSON record.
paginationNoPagination metadata: total count and next offset.
totalCountNoTotal results across all pages.
effectiveQueryNoThe browse scope and applied filters.

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With readOnlyHint and idempotentHint already present, the description adds valuable non-obvious behaviors: committee code inference from the prefix, approximate fuzzy-match labels, the 'bills' default ordering, and the upstream limitation that bill titles are omitted. These go well beyond what annotations or schema could convey.

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 every sentence adds decision-relevant detail: operation flow, code syntax, chamber handling, ordering behavior, and data limitations. Information is front-loaded with the overall purpose, then logically progresses from discovery to retrieval to chaining.

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?

Given the tool's eight parameters, five operations, and an output schema, the description covers all necessary context: operation selection, parameter dependencies, default behaviors, Senate-only restriction, and how to overcome the missing-titles gap by chaining to another tool. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is absent.

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%, establishing a baseline of 3, but the description substantially enriches parameter semantics. It explains the internal structure and case-insensitivity of committeeCode, reveals that any non-blank value is auto-resolved as a committee name, and clarifies the order parameter's scope and defaults beyond the schema's enum text.

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-resource pair ('Browse congressional committees and their legislation, reports, and nominations') and enumerates the exact sub-operations, making it immediately distinguishable from sibling bill, member, and report tools. It also names the chaining target (congressgov_bill_lookup get), reinforcing its role in the broader tool family.

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?

The description provides an explicit workflow: use 'list' (with optional 'filter') to discover committee codes, then use 'get' or sub-resources. It also gives exclusion guidance ('nominations' is Senate-only) and explains when chamber should be passed explicitly versus inferred, leaving no ambiguity about operation selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Each tool maps to a distinct Congress.gov content area, but a few boundaries overlap: bill_summaries vs. bill_lookup's summaries operation, committee_lookup's reports/nominations drill-downs vs. committee_reports/senate_nominations. The descriptions clarify the intended use cases, so an agent can mostly choose correctly.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a uniform, predictable pattern: congressgov_ + snake_case noun phrase. Although the convention is noun-based rather than verb_noun, it is consistent across all 10 tools and clearly signals the data domain.

Tool Count5/5

Ten tools is well-scoped for a Congress.gov data server. Each tool covers a major content type—bills, summaries, committees, reports, CRS reports, the Record, enacted laws, members, votes, and nominations—without redundancy or filler.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface provides strong read coverage across bills, summaries, committees, reports, the Congressional Record, enacted laws, members, votes, and nominations. Minor gaps remain, such as no standalone amendments/treaties browsing and no keyword search across bills or members, but most workflows can be completed by chaining existing tools.