Skip to main content
Glama
amurshak

CongressMCP-full

Congressional Records and Hearings - Legislative records, communications, and hearings

records_and_hearings

Search and retrieve U.S. Congressional Records, House and Senate communications, and committee hearings. Query by date, congress, or chamber to access full-text legislative documents and structured metadata.

Instructions

Congressional Records and Hearings - Access legislative records, communications, and hearings.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORDS (3 operations):
• search_congressional_record/daily/bound - Search legislative records by date/volume

COMMUNICATIONS (8 operations):  
• House: search_house_communications/requirements, get_details/matching
• Senate: search_senate_communications, get_senate_communication_details
• Committee: get_committee_communication_details

HEARINGS (5 operations):
• search_hearings, get_hearings_by_congress/chamber, get_hearing_details/content

Key params: operation, year/month/day, keywords, congress, chamber, jacket_number
Returns structured record/hearing data with full text content and metadata.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
operationYes
yearNo
monthNo
dayNo
congressNo
volume_numberNo
issue_numberNo
limitNo
communication_typeNo
communication_numberNo
chamberNo
requirement_numberNo
keywordsNo
jacket_numberNo
from_date_timeNo
to_date_timeNo
sortNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It partially succeeds by stating the return format ('structured record/hearing data with full text content'), but fails to mention read-only status, rate limits, pagination behavior, or authentication requirements.

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 description uses clear visual hierarchy with category headers (CONGRESSIONAL RECORDS, COMMUNICATIONS, HEARINGS) and bullet points for scanability. The 'Key params' section is usefully front-loaded. Minor deduction for repeating the title in the first sentence.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given high complexity (17 parameters, 0% schema coverage) and presence of an output schema, the description adequately catalogs available operations but insufficiently documents parameter interactions. The return value description is acceptable given the output schema exists, but parameter documentation gaps are significant for a tool with this many arguments.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% (titles only, no descriptions). The description lists 'Key params' by name but provides no semantic explanation—critical parameters like 'jacket_number', 'communication_type', and date formats (for 'from_date_time') remain undefined. The mapping between the bulleted operation names and the 'operation' parameter is implied but not explicit.

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 clearly identifies the three resource domains (Congressional Records, Communications, Hearings) and uses specific verbs (search, get, access). It distinguishes from siblings like 'bills' or 'amendments' by focusing on legislative records and hearing content rather than legislative text or voting data.

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?

While the description catalogs 16 specific operations, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like 'get_committee_communications' or 'get_committee_bills'. It lacks prerequisites, exclusions, or decision criteria for selecting between overlapping functionality.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/amurshak/congressMCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server