Nosdeputes Fr

List Votes

list_votes

Read-onlyIdempotent

Recorded votes (scrutins) of the French Assemblee nationale as published by the NosDeputes.fr civic-tech mirror, optionally narrowed to the votes cast by one deputy via deputy_slug, across the 16th (default), 15th, or 14th legislature. Returns the vote records NosDeputes holds for that chamber. Answers how the French Assembly, or a named French deputy, voted.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	1-100 (default 25)
`deputy_slug`	No	Filter to votes cast by a specific deputy
`legislature`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`votes`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedMay 27, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "limit": 25
+  },
+  {
+    "deputy_slug": "jean-luc-melenchon",
+    "limit": 50
+  }
+]

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "votes": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "abstention": {
+            "description": "Abstentions",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "contre": {
+            "description": "Votes against",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "date": {
+            "description": "Vote date (YYYY-MM-DD)",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "description": "Vote identifier",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "nonvotant": {
+            "description": "Non-voters",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "parlementaire": {
+            "description": "Deputy slug (if filtered)",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "position": {
+            "description": "Deputy vote (pour/contre/abstention/nonvotant)",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "pour": {
+            "description": "Votes in favor",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "resultat": {
+            "description": "Result (Adoptée/Rejetée/etc)",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "resume": {
+            "description": "Vote summary",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "titre": {
+            "description": "Vote title/subject",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "url": {
+            "description": "Full URL to vote details",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedMay 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that data comes from the NosDeputes.fr mirror and returns what that mirror holds, giving useful scope context without contradicting 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, no redundant content. Every sentence adds value: what it lists, optional filters, and the underlying source.

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, the description doesn't need to detail return fields. It covers purpose, scope, source, filter options, and legislature defaults, making it complete for a list-type tool.

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 67%, and the description compensates by explaining deputy_slug (filter to a named deputy) and legislature (16th default, 15th or 14th). The limit param is already described in the schema, so the description adds meaningful value for the other params.

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 lists recorded votes (scrutins) of the French Assemblée nationale, with optional deputy filtering and legislature range. It distinguishes from sibling list_deputies and get_deputy by focusing on votes rather than legislators.

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?

Provides concrete usage context: it answers how the French Assembly or a named deputy voted, and notes optional narrowing by deputy_slug and legislature selection with default 16th. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All Nosdeputes Fr 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.