Skip to main content
Glama

Nosdeputes Fr

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search Interventions

search_interventions
Read-onlyIdempotent

Full-text search across debate contributions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo1-100 (default 25)
queryYes
date_toNoYYYY-MM-DD
date_fromNoYYYY-MM-DD
deputy_slugNoRestrict to a specific deputy
legislatureNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
interventionsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "query": "climat"
+  },
+  {
+    "date_from": "2023-01-01",
+    "date_to": "2024-01-01",
+    "deputy_slug": "marine-le-pen",
+    "limit": 50,
+    "query": "réforme des retraites"
+  }
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "interventions": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "commission": {
+            "description": "Commission name if applicable",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "debut": {
+            "description": "Start time (ISO 8601)",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "fin": {
+            "description": "End time (ISO 8601)",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "fonction": {
+            "description": "Speaker role/function",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "hemicycle": {
+            "description": "Spoken in hemicycle",
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "description": "Intervention identifier",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "nom_complet": {
+            "description": "Full name of speaker",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "parlementaire": {
+            "description": "Deputy slug",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "resume": {
+            "description": "Text excerpt of intervention",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "source": {
+            "description": "Source document",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "url": {
+            "description": "Full URL to intervention",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint:false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no further behavioral context such as pagination, result ordering, or rate limits. It is consistent with annotations but adds minimal value beyond them.

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 sentence of fewer than ten words, front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word earns its place, with no filler or repetition.

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 tool is relatively simple, has a rich output schema, and strong annotations that cover safety and side effects. The description is sufficient for understanding the tool's primary purpose, though it could benefit from noting sorting or default behavior. Overall, it is adequately complete for the tool's complexity.

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 description coverage is 67%, with query and legislature lacking descriptions. The tool description provides no additional parameter semantics, leaving the undocumented parameters without clarification. It also does not elaborate on the meaning of 'query' or how date/deputy filters combine.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Full-text search across debate contributions.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_questions, which focus on questions, and search_within, which implies a different search scope.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies the tool is used to search debate contributions, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over alternatives such as search_questions or search_within. No exclusions or alternative suggestions are provided.

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

All Nosdeputes Fr 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