Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Gemral Edge

by io.github.gemral-edge
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Congress Trades Near Federal Contracts

get_committee_conflict_map

Deterministic factual alignment between congressional committee jurisdictions, lawmaker stock transactions, and federal agency contract awards. Sourced from official House and Senate disclosures and federal procurement registries. Read-only evidence.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_committee_conflict_map"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
tickerNoStock ticker, e.g. LMT, RTX, PLTR
politician_slugNoPolitician slug identifier
max_overlap_daysNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noticeNoFree-tier upgrade notice; only when results are masked/delayed.
resultsYesTool result payload (read-only evidence). Shape varies by tool; scoring weights are never exposed.
history_limitNoPresent when the license limits history depth: earliest_allowed date, history_days and how many older items were removed.
deprecated_fieldsNoPresent only while a renamed key is still returned next to its replacement: field (old key), replacement (new key, same value), removal (ISO date after which the old key is gone).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / deprecated_fields
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Present only while a renamed key is still returned next to its replacement: field (old key), replacement (new key, same value), removal (ISO date after which the old key is gone).",
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds real context beyond annotations by disclosing provenance (official House/Senate disclosures and federal procurement registries) and framing results as factual rather than interpretive. However, it never explains how 'overlap' is determined, whether absence of results means no conflict or missing data, or why the annotation declares readOnlyHint=false while the prose says 'Read-only evidence' — a tension an agent should have resolved explicitly.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and then provenance, with no filler. The jargon density ('deterministic factual alignment') costs a little clarity but nothing is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and provenance is covered. Against that, a four-parameter analytical tool with a badly under-documented max_overlap_days and no filtering guidance leaves the agent without enough to invoke it confidently.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is only 50%; ticker and politician_slug are documented in the schema, but limit and max_overlap_days are not, and the description discusses no parameter at all. max_overlap_days in particular is meaningless without explanation of what window it measures, and the description does nothing to fill that gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the three resources being joined (committee jurisdictions, lawmaker stock transactions, federal agency contract awards), which is concrete enough for an agent to know what the tool returns. It is weakened by the abstract framing 'deterministic factual alignment' and by not distinguishing itself from plausible siblings like get_contract_beneficiaries or get_policy_affected_companies.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to reach for this tool versus the many adjacent tools in the sibling list, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer usage from the title alone.

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

All Gemral Edge toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources