Skip to main content
Glama
SidneyBissoli

Senado BR — Brazilian Federal Senate Open Data

by SidneyBissoli
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Vetos presidenciais

senado_vetos
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve Brazilian presidential vetoes under congressional review, filtered by year or status. Get veto details, count, and voting deadline.

Instructions

Lista vetos presidenciais em apreciação pelo Congresso Nacional, por ano ou por status de tramitação. Retorna { count, total, aviso?, vetos }, com cada veto trazendo codigo, identificacao, ementa, emTramitacao, materiaVetada, tipo (total/parcial), assunto e dataLimiteVotacao (prazo de sobrestamento de pauta). limite controla o corte (padrão 100; aviso indica truncagem). Informe ano OU status (tramitando/antes-rcn/encerrados). Para o resultado da votação de um veto use senado_resultado_veto.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
anoNoVetos do ano informado
limiteNoMáximo de resultados (padrão: 100)
statusNotramitando = pós-RCN 1/2013 em tramitação (padrão); antes-rcn = anteriores à RCN; encerrados = tramitação encerrada

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv3.9.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • changedOutput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv3.3.3
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
      Previous value: -trueNew value: +{}
  3. First observedv3.3.1

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds truncation behavior ('limite' controls the cut, 'aviso' indicates truncation) which goes beyond annotations, but does not discuss rate limits or freshness.

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?

Front-loaded with the tool's purpose, then return shape, then parameter control, then the alternative tool. Dense and well-ordered, though the response-shape enumeration is lengthy. No filler sentences.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description helpfully enumerates the returned fields and semantics (e.g., dataLimiteVotacao as sobrestamento deadline), and covers both filter modes and truncation. An agent has enough to call it correctly; minor gap is no mention of what happens if both ano and status are omitted.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters including the enum meanings for status. The description adds the ano/status exclusivity constraint and the default cut-off, but mostly repeats schema content. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('vetos presidenciais'), plus scope ('em apreciação pelo Congresso Nacional') and filter dimensions ('por ano ou por status de tramitação'). Distinguishes itself from the sibling senado_resultado_veto by directing voting-result queries there.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states the mutually exclusive parameters ('Informe `ano` OU `status`') with the valid enum values, and names the alternative tool senado_resultado_veto for the different use case of a specific veto's voting outcome.

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