Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
statefinance-mcp

statefinance-mcp

by cstillick
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

top_donors

Retrieve top donors to a recipient committee ranked by total contribution amount. Specify a recipient, optional election cycle, and number of results for focused campaign finance analysis.

Instructions

The top donors to a recipient committee, ranked by total given (spelling variants combined via light normalization).

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": {
      "recipient": "<recipient>"
    },
    "name": "top_donors"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
recipientYes
cycleNo
nNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds behavioral context about spelling variant normalization but lacks details on output format, pagination, rate limits, or being read-only. With no annotations, it partially fulfills transparency.

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?

A single sentence with no fluff, but could be better structured with parameter hints. However, it is concise and front-loaded with the main action.

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?

With 3 undocumented parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient for correct invocation. It lacks details on how to specify cycle or n, and what the return value contains.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema coverage is 0% and the description provides no explanation of parameters (recipient, cycle, n). The agent must infer their meaning from names alone, which is insufficient.

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?

The description clearly states the tool returns top donors to a recipient committee, ranked by total given, with spelling normalization. It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like donor_history or search_contributions.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, prerequisites, or scenarios. The description only states what it does without context for selection.

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