Skip to main content
Glama

congressgov-mcp-server

by io.github.cyanheads

Congress.gov Senate Nominations

congressgov_senate_nominations
Read-onlyIdempotent

Browse presidential nominations to federal positions and track the Senate confirmation process. Use 'list' to browse, 'get' for nomination detail, 'actions'/'committees'/'hearings' for confirmation pipeline data, or 'nominees' to retrieve individual appointees in a multi-nominee batch. Nominations use 'PN' (Presidential Nomination) numbering. Most nominations carry confirmation activity on the parent (e.g., PN1000); multi-part parents (e.g., PN851) carry no activity of their own — their actions, committees, hearings, and nominees live on partitioned children (PN851-1, PN851-2, …). 'get' on a parent that has no nominees array signals the partitioned form is needed for everything below it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoResults per page (1-250).
offsetNoPagination offset.
ordinalNoBatch ordinal within a multi-nominee nomination. Each ordinal addresses a group of nominees; the 'nominees' operation returns every individual in that batch. Use 'get' first to see available ordinals on the nomination's `nominees` array (multi-part parents have no nominees array — use a partitioned form like '851-1' instead).
congressYesCongress number.
operationYesWhich data to retrieve.
nominationNumberNoNomination number. Use the bare form (e.g. '1000') for nominations whose activity sits on the parent; use the partitioned form (e.g. '851-1') for sub-resources of a multi-part nomination. Required for detail operations.

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.
nominationNoDynamic upstream JSON record.
paginationNoPagination metadata: total count and next offset.
totalCountNoTotal results across all pages.
effectiveQueryNoThe browse scope and applied filters.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/openWorld annotations, the description discloses crucial non-obvious behavior: parent nominations like PN1000 carry activity, while multi-part parents like PN851 carry none and require partitioned children. It even provides a diagnostic rule—'get on a parent that has no nominees array signals the partitioned form is needed'—which is exactly the kind of behavioral nuance an agent needs.

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 earns its place: purpose, operation routing, numbering scheme, parent/child quirk, and a detection heuristic. The most important operational constraint is front-loaded with concrete examples, and there is 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?

Given the tool's complexity—six operations, nuanced multi-part nominations, and partition behavior—the description covers everything needed to select and invoke it correctly. The presence of an output schema means return values need not be explained in prose, and the HTTP-like safety profile is covered by annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the input schema already documents operation, nominationNumber, ordinal, congress, limit, and offset in detail. The description adds a useful decision procedure for choosing bare vs partitioned nomination numbers, but largely restates semantics already present in the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Browse presidential nominations to federal positions and track the Senate confirmation process.' It then enumerates the exact operations and what each returns, making the tool's purpose unmistakable and clearly distinct from the unrelated congressional siblings.

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 gives explicit operation-by-operation routing: 'Use list to browse, get for nomination detail, actions/committees/hearings for confirmation pipeline data, or nominees to retrieve individual appointees.' It also explains when to use bare versus partitioned nomination numbers, so an agent knows exactly how to select parameters for the right data.

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

All congressgov-mcp-server 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

A4.4/5.0
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.

Resources