Skip to main content
Glama

Openstates

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search Bills

search_bills
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search bills in any US statehouse. Pass jurisdiction as a 2-letter state code (e.g., "CA", "NY", "TX") or full name. Returns bill identifiers, titles, classifications, last action, sponsors, and OpenStates IDs for use with get_bill.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo1-based page (default 1)
sortNoupdated_desc | updated_asc | first_action_desc | first_action_asc | latest_action_desc | latest_action_asc
queryNoFree-text search across title/summary
sessionNoSession identifier (e.g., "20232024")
sponsorNoLegislator name filter
per_pageNo1-50 (default 20)
jurisdictionYes2-letter state code or jurisdiction name
classificationNobill | resolution | constitutional amendment | etc.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageYesCurrent page number
billsYes
totalYesTotal matching bills across all pages
returnedYesNumber of bills in this response
total_pagesYesTotal number of pages

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "jurisdiction": "CA",
+    "query": "healthcare"
+  },
+  {
+    "classification": "bill",
+    "jurisdiction": "NY",
+    "per_page": 10,
+    "query": "education funding",
+    "session": "20232024",
+    "sort": "updated_desc",
+    "sponsor": "Smith"
+  }
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "bills": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "chamber": {
+            "description": "Chamber (upper/lower) or organization",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "classification": {
+            "description": "Bill type classifications",
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "identifier": {
+            "description": "Bill identifier (e.g., AB-123)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "jurisdiction": {
+            "description": "State or jurisdiction name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "latest_action": {
+            "description": "Description of latest action",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "latest_action_date": {
+            "description": "Date of latest action",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "openstates_id": {
+            "description": "OpenStates bill ID",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "openstates_url": {
+            "description": "Link to OpenStates page",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "session": {
+            "description": "Legislative session",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "subject": {
+            "description": "Subject tags",
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "description": "Bill title",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "page": {
+      "description": "Current page number",
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "returned": {
+      "description": "Number of bills in this response",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "total": {
+      "description": "Total matching bills across all pages",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "total_pages": {
+      "description": "Total number of pages",
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "total",
+    "page",
+    "total_pages",
+    "returned",
+    "bills"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, establishing the safety profile. The description adds valuable behavioral context by specifying the required jurisdiction format and the output's purpose for use with get_bill, enhancing the agent's understanding beyond the 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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and includes essential execution guidance (jurisdiction format, return fields, workflow linkage). Every sentence contributes information without redundancy.

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?

For a search tool with a rich input schema and an output schema available, the description covers the essential context: how to specify jurisdiction, what results include, and how they connect to get_bill. Pagination and filtering options are already documented in the schema, so no further detail is needed here.

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%, with each parameter already described. The description adds minor value by giving concrete examples of jurisdiction values ('CA', 'NY', 'TX') and noting that OpenStates IDs are returned, but it does not significantly deepen parameter understanding beyond the schema baseline.

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 begins with a specific verb-action ('Search') and clearly identifies the resource ('bills') and scope ('any US statehouse'). It explicitly states the jurisdiction input format and lists the return fields, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_bill and search_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?

The description provides clear context for use: it is a search tool that returns OpenStates IDs 'for use with get_bill', establishing a complementary workflow. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for similar tasks (e.g., search_legislators), 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 Openstates 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