Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
nyc-council-mcp

nyc-council-mcp

by BetaNYC
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

get_committee

Look up an NYC Council committee by full or partial name and return its current membership count and details.

Instructions

Look up an NYC Council committee by name. Returns current membership count and details.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "get_committee"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesFull or partial committee name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.7.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, but the read-only nature is strongly implied by 'Look up' and 'Returns'. It usefully discloses that the response includes membership count and committee details, yet says nothing about permission requirements or how ambiguous name matches are resolved.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the return content. There is no filler and nothing an agent would need to skip past.

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?

For a one-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the description covers what the tool does and roughly what comes back. The main gap is the unresolved question of partial-name ambiguity, which matters given the schema explicitly allows partial matches.

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%, and the single 'name' parameter is already documented as accepting 'Full or partial committee name'. The description adds only the redundant phrase 'by name', so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Look up an NYC Council committee by name') and names the entity clearly enough to separate it from siblings like get_bill and get_council_member, which operate on different resources. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with any alternative, so it lands at clear-but-not-differentiating.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no note about what happens when a partial name matches multiple committees. The agent is left to infer entirely that this is the lookup tool for committee entities.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools