Nass

Nass Crop Progress

nass_crop_progress

Read-onlyIdempotent

Weekly USDA crop progress + condition by crop and state. For CONDITION queries ("what % of corn is good or excellent", "crop condition this week") the response includes a condition_summary with the latest national week's ratings AND the standard combined good_or_excellent_pct. For PROGRESS use stat_category="PROGRESS" (planted/emerged/harvested %). Pass stat_category to narrow (otherwise both are returned).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`year`	No	Year, e.g., "2026". Optional — defaults to current year.
`state`	No	State name (optional, defaults to national)
`_apiKey`	Yes	NASS API key
`commodity`	Yes	Crop: "CORN", "SOYBEANS", "WHEAT", "COTTON", "SORGHUM"
`stat_category`	No	Narrow to "CONDITION" (good/excellent ratings) or "PROGRESS" (planting/harvest %). Optional — omit for both.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	Yes	Weekly crop progress and condition reports
`count`	Yes	Number of records returned
`truncated`	Yes	True if results exceed 200 records

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedAug 5, 2026

changedInput schema / examples

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "_apiKey": "your-nass-api-key",
-    "commodity": "CORN",
-    "state": "IOWA",
-    "year": "2024"
-  },
-  {
-    "_apiKey": "your-nass-api-key",
-    "commodity": "SOYBEANS",
-    "year": "2024"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "_apiKey": "your-nass-api-key",
+    "commodity": "CORN",
+    "state": "IOWA",
+    "year": "2026"
+  },
+  {
+    "_apiKey": "your-nass-api-key",
+    "commodity": "SOYBEANS",
+    "year": "2026"
+  }
+]

changedInput schema / properties / year / description

Previous value: -"Year, e.g., \"2024\" (required for progress data)"New value: +"Year, e.g., \"2026\". Optional — defaults to current year."

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "_apiKey",
-  "commodity",
-  "year"
-]New value: +[
+  "_apiKey",
+  "commodity"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedJul 13, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / stat_category

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Narrow to \"CONDITION\" (good/excellent ratings) or \"PROGRESS\" (planting/harvest %). Optional — omit for both.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedMay 8, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Number of records returned",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "data": {
+      "description": "Weekly crop progress and condition reports",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "agg_level": {
+            "description": "Aggregation level",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "commodity": {
+            "description": "Crop name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "county": {
+            "description": "County name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "description": {
+            "description": "Progress metric description",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "frequency": {
+            "description": "Always WEEKLY",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "period": {
+            "description": "Week reference period",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "stat_category": {
+            "description": "Progress stage (e.g., PLANTED, EMERGED, CONDITION)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "state": {
+            "description": "State name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "unit": {
+            "description": "Unit (e.g., PCT, rating category)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "value": {
+            "description": "Progress percentage or condition rating",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "year": {
+            "description": "Year",
+            "type": [
+              "integer",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "truncated": {
+      "description": "True if results exceed 200 records",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "count",
+    "data",
+    "truncated"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedMay 6, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "_apiKey": "your-nass-api-key",
+    "commodity": "CORN",
+    "state": "IOWA",
+    "year": "2024"
+  },
+  {
+    "_apiKey": "your-nass-api-key",
+    "commodity": "SOYBEANS",
+    "year": "2024"
+  }
+]

First observedApr 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds further context by disclosing that condition queries return a condition_summary with the latest national ratings plus good_or_excellent_pct, and that omitting stat_category returns both categories. This is meaningful behavioral detail 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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core resource, then provides targeted usage details. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or 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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description adds the critical nuance of condition_summary vs good_or_excellent_pct and the stat_category default behavior, making it complete for the tool's complexity. No key gaps remain.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the semantics of stat_category with concrete examples ('what % of corn is good or excellent') and clarifying that omitting it returns both categories, which is not obvious from the schema alone.

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 provides weekly USDA crop progress and condition data by crop and state. It distinguishes itself from sibling NASS tools (production, livestock, prices) by subject matter even without naming them. The explicit mention of CONDITION and PROGRESS categories adds specificity.

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 usage guidance on when to use stat_category='CONDITION' vs 'PROGRESS', including example queries and explains default behavior (both returned if not narrowed). It does not explicitly exclude alternative tools, but the resource scope is clear.

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

All Nass tools Inspect

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.