Skip to main content
Glama

Cfpb

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Cfpb Search Complaints

cfpb_search_complaints
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search consumer complaints by keyword, company, product, or date range. Returns complaint narratives, company responses, and resolution status.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of results (1-100, default 25)
queryNoSearch term (e.g., "overdraft fees", "denied claim"). Optional if other filters provided.
companyNoCompany name to filter by (e.g., "BANK OF AMERICA", "WELLS FARGO")
productNoProduct category (e.g., "Credit card", "Mortgage", "Student loan", "Vehicle loan or lease", "Checking or savings account", "Credit reporting", "Debt collection")
end_dateNoEnd date in YYYY-MM-DD format
start_dateNoStart date in YYYY-MM-DD format

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesSearch query term provided
totalYestotal (object for aggregations, number for scalar count).
filtersYes
complaintsYesList of complaint records

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / total / description
      Previous value: -"Total number of matching complaints"New value: +"total (object for aggregations, number for scalar count)."
    • changedOutput schema / properties / total / type
      Previous value: -"number"New value: +[
+  "object",
+  "number"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "complaints": {
+      "description": "List of complaint records",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "company": {
+            "description": "Company name",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "company_public_response": {
+            "description": "Public response from company",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "company_response": {
+            "description": "Company's response status",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "complaint_id": {
+            "description": "Unique complaint identifier",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "consumer_disputed": {
+            "description": "Whether consumer disputed resolution",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "date_received": {
+            "description": "Date complaint was received",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "issue": {
+            "description": "Main complaint issue",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "narrative": {
+            "description": "Consumer complaint narrative",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "product": {
+            "description": "Product category (e.g., Credit card, Mortgage)",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "state": {
+            "description": "Consumer state (2-letter code)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "sub_issue": {
+            "description": "Subcategory of issue",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "sub_product": {
+            "description": "Subcategory of product",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "submitted_via": {
+            "description": "Submission method (e.g., web, phone)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "timely": {
+            "description": "Whether response was timely",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "filters": {
+      "properties": {
+        "company": {
+          "description": "Company filter applied",
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "date_range": {
+          "properties": {
+            "end": {
+              "description": "End date of range (YYYY-MM-DD)",
+              "type": [
+                "string",
+                "null"
+              ]
+            },
+            "start": {
+              "description": "Start date of range (YYYY-MM-DD)",
+              "type": [
+                "string",
+                "null"
+              ]
+            }
+          },
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "product": {
+          "description": "Product category filter applied",
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "query": {
+      "description": "Search query term provided",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "total": {
+      "description": "Total number of matching complaints",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "query",
+    "filters",
+    "total",
+    "complaints"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "limit": 25,
+    "query": "overdraft fees"
+  },
+  {
+    "company": "WELLS FARGO",
+    "end_date": "2024-01-01",
+    "limit": 50,
+    "product": "Checking or savings account",
+    "start_date": "2023-01-01"
+  }
+]
  4. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds value by specifying the returned data (complaint narratives, company responses, resolution status), which goes beyond annotations.

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 a single efficient sentence that front-loads the action and key filters. No superfluous text.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description covers the core functionality and output types. With an output schema present, it does not need to elaborate return values further. However, it omits details like pagination or rate limits, which are not critical given the 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%, so the schema itself documents all parameters thoroughly. The description does not add additional semantic meaning beyond summarizing the filter options already in the schema.

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 tool searches consumer complaints by multiple criteria (keyword, company, product, date range) and returns specific output (narratives, responses, resolution status). It distinguishes from sibling tools like cfpb_company_complaints and cfpb_get_complaint.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as cfpb_company_complaints or cfpb_product_breakdown. The description does not mention alternatives or exclusionary cases.

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

All Cfpb 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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

There are multiple overlapping tools for querying data (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, validate_claim, bet_research) that could confuse an agent, though descriptions are detailed enough to distinguish most. Tools like polymarket_edges and polymarket_edge_tracker are closely related, and ai_visibility_check vs scan_competitor_ai_presence overlap.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming is highly inconsistent: some follow verb_noun (cfpb_search_complaints, resolve_entity, subscribe, recall), but many use varied patterns like adjectives (ai_visibility_check), imperative phrases (ask_pipeworx, scan_competitor_ai_presence), or compound/specialized names (polymarket_arbitrage, generate_llms_txt). No consistent prefix or convention is used across the toolset.

Tool Count2/5

With 36 tools spanning diverse domains (prediction markets, SEC filings, CFPB complaints, AI visibility, npm packages, IPC subscriptions), the server is sprawling and over-scoped. Many tools are specialized niche additions (polymarket_fill_risk, scan_dependency, generate_llms_txt) that expand the count without strong cohesion.

Completeness3/5

The toolset covers core areas well (entity resolution, profile, comparison, recent changes, search, claims verification, subscriptions). However, gaps exist: no update/delete for CFPB complaints (read-only), no direct raw SEC filing retrieval, and some lifecycle operations (e.g., editing subscriptions) are missing.

Resources