Skip to main content
Glama
bmorphism

Penumbra MCP Server

get_governance_proposals

Retrieve active governance proposals from the Penumbra blockchain to stay informed about ongoing community decisions and voting processes.

Instructions

Get active governance proposals

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusNoFilter proposals by statusactive

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the get_governance_proposals tool logic. It returns mock data for governance proposals filtered by status, with error handling.
    private async getGovernanceProposals(status: string) {
      try {
        // TODO: Implement actual governance proposals query
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: JSON.stringify({
                proposals: [
                  {
                    id: "1",
                    title: "Example Proposal",
                    status: "active",
                    votingEndTime: new Date(Date.now() + CONFIG.governance.votingPeriod).toISOString(),
                    minDeposit: CONFIG.governance.minDepositAmount,
                    yesVotes: "750000",
                    noVotes: "250000"
                  }
                ]
              }, null, 2),
            },
          ],
        };
      } catch (error: unknown) {
        const errorMessage = error instanceof Error ? error.message : 'Unknown error occurred';
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: `Error fetching governance proposals: ${errorMessage}`,
            },
          ],
          isError: true,
        };
      }
    }
  • src/index.ts:136-151 (registration)
    Registration of the get_governance_proposals tool in the MCP server tools list, including name, description, and input schema.
    {
      name: 'get_governance_proposals',
      description: 'Get active governance proposals',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          status: {
            type: 'string',
            enum: ['active', 'completed', 'all'],
            description: 'Filter proposals by status',
            default: 'active'
          }
        },
        required: [],
      },
    }
  • Input schema definition for the get_governance_proposals tool, specifying the optional 'status' parameter with enum values.
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {
        status: {
          type: 'string',
          enum: ['active', 'completed', 'all'],
          description: 'Filter proposals by status',
          default: 'active'
        }
      },
      required: [],
    },
  • Dispatcher case in the CallToolRequestHandler that invokes the getGovernanceProposals handler with parsed status argument.
    case 'get_governance_proposals':
      return await this.getGovernanceProposals(
        (request.params.arguments?.status as string) || 'active'
      );
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Get' implies a read operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, has rate limits, returns paginated results, or what format the output takes. The description is minimal and lacks essential operational details for a tool that likely interacts with governance systems.

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?

The description is extremely concise—just three words—and front-loaded with the core action. There is zero wasted language, making it efficient for quick comprehension. However, this conciseness comes at the cost of completeness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficient for a governance tool. It doesn't explain what 'governance proposals' entail, what data is returned, or any behavioral traits. For a tool that likely returns structured governance data, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'status' fully documented in the schema (including enum values and default). The description mentions 'active' proposals, which aligns with the default value but doesn't add any semantic context beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states the verb ('Get') and resource ('active governance proposals'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It specifies the scope ('active') which helps distinguish it from other governance-related tools that might exist, though no direct siblings exist in the provided list. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from hypothetical alternatives like 'get_all_governance_proposals' or 'get_proposal_details'.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, dependencies, or scenarios where this tool is preferred over others. With no sibling tools directly overlapping in function, this is less critical, but still a gap in usage context.

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

Related 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/bmorphism/penumbra-mcp'

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