va-lis-mcp

get_committee_staff

The clerks and staff who serve a committee.

Instructions

The clerks and staff who serve a committee.

committee is a number ("H08", "S13") or any part of a name; pass chamber or the number when both chambers use the name. role is Committee Clerk or Committee Staff, the Division of Legislative Services staff assigned to the committee. The list is not session scoped: it names who serves now, and since is when each assignment began. LIS sends no phone number or email for staff.

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": {
      "committee": "<committee>"
    },
    "name": "get_committee_staff"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chamber`	No
`committee`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.2.0Oct 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does add real behavioral context: the roster is not session-scoped (names current servers), ``since`` marks assignment start, and LIS provides no phone/email for staff. It stops short of stating auth/permission needs or rate limits, but for a read-style lookup it discloses more than most.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and the remaining sentences are dense with usable detail. The inline-code formatting and stacked clauses make it slightly harder to scan than it could be, but there is little wasted text.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained; the description instead spends its words on filtering behavior and data freshness, which is the right allocation. Both input parameters are addressed, leaving only the ambiguity around the referenced ``role`` as a gap.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: it gives ``committee`` example values ("H08", "S13"), explains that any part of a name is accepted, and clarifies when ``chamber`` is needed to disambiguate. The mention of ``role`` is ambiguous since no such parameter exists (it appears to be an output field), which slightly muddies the parameter story.

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 opening sentence states a specific resource (clerks and staff serving a committee) clearly enough that an agent knows what the tool returns. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish this from neighboring tools like get_committee or list_committees, so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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 only implied. The note that "the list is not session scoped" and the guidance on passing ``chamber`` when both chambers share a name are helpful context, but the description never says when to choose this tool over get_committee or list_committees, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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