Election Index

Can polls be published before this election?

poll_blackout

Read-only

Whether a country bans publishing opinion polls before a vote, checked now: verdict ban / no-ban / exit-polls-only / unverified, when a ban starts and ends (polls close), whether it is in force, the law and article, and the official text it was read in. Answers "Can I publish a poll in Spain this week?" or "When does the poll blackout end in Serbia?". Give an election id, or a country for its next vote. "unverified" means we hold no verified rule: it is not a finding that polls are allowed. Not legal advice.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`country`	No	Country name or ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code, e.g. "Austria" or "AT", "United States" or "US"; answers for its next election
`election`	No	Election id, e.g. "spain-general-2026"

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"
+}
```
AddedOct 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only mark it read-only; the description goes well beyond by defining the 'unverified' verdict as absence of a verified rule rather than a permission finding — a critical misuse guard — and by adding the 'Not legal advice' disclaimer for a legally consequential answer. It also discloses the evidentiary basis (law and article, official text read) behind each verdict.

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?

The verdict list and the 'unverified' caveat are front-loaded, and every clause carries information. The single sentence enumerating returned fields runs long and could be tightened, but nothing is 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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is optional, yet the description still summarizes what comes back. Combined with the verdict taxonomy, the negative-case semantics, and the legal caveat, an agent has everything needed to call it and to frame the answer correctly.

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, but the description adds the either/or relationship between the two optional parameters ('Give an election id, or a country for its next vote') and the consequence of choosing country (it answers for the next election), which the schema alone does not state.

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 names the resource (pre-election poll publication rules) and enumerates the exact verdict vocabulary (blocked/enforced/partial/none), plus the returned fields (window dates, in-force status, statute citation, official source text). An agent can distinguish this from election_status or next_election purely from the text.

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?

It supplies two concrete usage examples ('Can I publish a poll in Spain this week?', 'When does the poll blackout end in Serbia?') and states the two input modes: an election id, or a country resolved to its next vote. It does not explicitly name sibling tools or say when NOT to use this tool, so it stops 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 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?