Election Index

Check a question

check_question

Read-only

Is a question about a given count stage answerable at a given time? Returns verdict ok / too-early / inside-window / too-late, settle_after, and the resolvable sources. Built to stop questions that read the provisional count when they mean the final one.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`race`	No	Race id, e.g. "president"; optional when the election has one race
`stage`	No	Default final-result
`ask_at`	No	ISO date-time; default now
`election`	Yes	Election id, e.g. "brazil-general-2026"; list ids with upcoming_elections

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`meta`	Yes	What this answer was built from; cite dataset_version
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 4, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / meta / properties / doi

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Zenodo concept DOI: the latest archived release",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedNov 3, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / meta / properties / copyright
```
Added value: +{
+  "description": "Rights holder",
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 17, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / resolution_sources / items / properties / figures_in_html

Added value: +{
+  "description": "For a results page: whether its own HTML shows a count (false: figures load by script or the page only links on; null: not read)",
+  "type": [
+    "boolean",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / resolution_sources / items / properties / oracle_reads

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Settlement-oracle lab reads of this URL: right, wrong, unread, lab, at",
+  "type": [
+    "object",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / result / properties / secondary_source

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Global Election Index's own page with the count we recorded: a secondary source when the authority's page cannot be read. Null until a count is recorded.",
+  "properties": {
+    "copied_from": {
+      "description": "The authority file or page the figures come from",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "final": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "publisher": {
+      "description": "Publisher",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "retrieved_at": {
+      "description": "When we read the count (ISO)",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "stage": {
+      "description": "Count stage of the figures shown",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "description": "Race results page",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": [
+    "object",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

First observedSep 27, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond them by disclosing the verdict vocabulary and the notion that the tool also returns settle_after and resolvable sources, which frames the behavior as a guard rather than a data fetch. It does not discuss limits, error modes, or what happens with an unknown race, so it is not exhaustive.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three tight sentences: the core question first, the return shape second, the motivating rationale last. No filler or repeated name restatement. The verdict list is slightly compressed into a slash-separated string but remains parseable.

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?

With a 100%-documented schema, an output schema, and read-only annotations, the description only needs to convey purpose and the verdict semantics — both are present. The one gap is routing guidance against closely related siblings such as when_final and resolution_sources, which matters given the crowded namespace.

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 coverage is 100%, so election, race, stage, and ask_at are all documented with examples and defaults in the schema itself. The description only echoes "given count stage" and "given time" without adding format, precedence, or defaulting behavior beyond what the schema states. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a precise, answerable question ("Is a question about a given count stage answerable at a given time?") and states the return contract: verdict ok/too-early/inside-window/too-late plus settle_after and resolvable sources. That is a specific verb+resource, not a restatement of the name. It stops short of naming sibling tools (when_final, election_status) that an agent might confuse it with.

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?

Usage is implied by the closing rationale ("Built to stop questions that read the provisional count when they mean the final one"), which tells the agent this is a pre-flight gate before asking about a count stage. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not phrasing and no named alternative for cases like "when will the result be final?" where when_final would be the right sibling.

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

All Election Index 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.

Resources

Need Help?