Skip to main content
Glama

nonprofit-explorer-mcp-server

by io.github.cyanheads

Get Nonprofit Filings

nonprofit_get_filings
Read-onlyIdempotent

All Form 990 filings for a tax-exempt org by EIN: year-by-year revenue, expenses, assets, liabilities, net assets, revenue breakdown, executive compensation, and source PDF links. Use for trend analysis, due diligence, and accessing primary 990 documents. The filing year (tax_prd_yr) is the fiscal year of the return — data lags 1–2 years; always cite the year. An organization that resolves but has filed no 990 returns an empty filings array with a notice, not an error. Also returns filings_pdf_only — older filings with a PDF but no extracted financial data. Data from ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer, sourced from IRS Form 990 filings.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
einYesEmployer Identification Number. Use nonprofit_search to resolve an org name to its EIN.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
einNoEmployer Identification Number as integer.
nameNoLegal org name per IRS.
errorNoPresent when the call failed. Absent on success.
noticeNoPresent when the organization resolved but Nonprofit Explorer holds no filing of any kind for it — names the org and why the filing history is empty. An empty filings array without this notice means the org has filings that carry a PDF but no extracted data; read filings_pdf_only.
filingsNoFilings with extracted financial data, sorted newest first.
data_sourceNoProPublica + IRS attribution text.
propublica_urlNoProPublica Nonprofit Explorer URL for this org.
filings_pdf_onlyNoOlder filings with a PDF but no extracted financial data.
total_filings_pdf_onlyNoCount of PDF-only filings (no extracted data).
total_filings_with_dataNoCount of filings with extracted financial data.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context: data lag of 1–2 years, the empty-filings edge case (returns notice, not error), the existence of filings_pdf_only, and the data source. These details extend beyond annotations and help the agent predict behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description front-loads the primary purpose and use cases, then appends crucial caveats (data lag, empty array, pdf-only). It is information-dense but not overly verbose; every sentence contributes meaningful guidance. Slightly long for a single paragraph, but well-structured with a logical flow.

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 (multiple return variations, data lag, edge cases) and the existence of an output schema, the description covers all essential operational details: what data is returned, how to interpret the year, error handling for no filings, and the source. No missing information prevents correct invocation.

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?

The input schema covers the ein parameter exhaustively (both integer and string forms, leading-zero handling, and a pointer to nonprofit_search). Schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add parameter semantics. It adds a note about fiscal year (tax_prd_yr) but that is not a parameter; thus baseline 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 clearly states the verb ('Get') and the resource: all Form 990 filings for a tax-exempt org by EIN. It enumerates the specific data provided (revenue, expenses, assets, etc.) and includes distinct output variations (filings_pdf_only), making its purpose unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like nonprofit_get_organization (org details) and nonprofit_search (EIN resolution).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives explicit use cases ('trend analysis, due diligence, accessing primary 990 documents') and clarifies the filing year lag, but it does not explicitly name when to use an alternative tool. The schema description does mention using nonprofit_search for name-to-EIN resolution, but the main description lacks direct sibling exclusions. Clear context with no exclusions warrants a 4.

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

All nonprofit-explorer-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

A4.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool serves a distinct, non-overlapping purpose: search for organizations, retrieve an organization's profile, and retrieve its filings. There is no ambiguity about which tool to use for a given task.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow the same 'nonprofit_<action>' pattern with verbs indicating the operation (search, get_filings, get_organization). The naming is clean, predictable, and consistent.

Tool Count5/5

With only three tools, the set is tightly scoped to the server's purpose of exploring nonprofit data. Each tool is essential and there is no bloat or redundancy, making the count appropriate.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the entire workflow: search to find entities, get details for a single entity, and retrieve historical filings for analysis. No obvious gaps exist for the stated purpose of exploring nonprofit data.

Resources