Skip to main content
Glama
lzinga

US Government Open Data MCP

by lzinga
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

congress_bill_cosponsors

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the complete list of cosponsors for any U.S. bill, including party affiliation and sponsorship dates. Provides individual details instead of a summary breakdown.

Instructions

Get the full list of cosponsors for a bill with party affiliation and sponsorship dates. Returns individual cosponsor details unlike congress_bill_details which only provides a party breakdown summary.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNoSort order. Value can be updateDate+asc or updateDate+desc
limitNoMax results (default: 250)
congressYesCongress number
bill_typeYesBill type
bill_numberYesBill number

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2026.9.14
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / default
      Added value: +250
    • addedInput schema / properties / sort / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "updateDate+asc",
+  "updateDate+desc"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2026.4.11
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  3. First observedv2026.3.9

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds that it returns individual cosponsor details with party and dates, which is useful, but it does not mention pagination (though the schema includes a limit parameter) or response structure. It neither contradicts annotations nor adds rich behavioral context beyond the basic return content.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the action and purpose, and the second differentiates from a sibling. Information is front-loaded and every phrase earns its place.

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?

For a read-only list tool with five parameters, all covered by schema, and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what it returns and how it differs from a related tool. It does not mention pagination or limits, but those are evident from the schema. No critical missing information for an agent to call it correctly.

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 all parameters (congress, bill_type, bill_number, sort, limit) are already documented in the schema. The description does not add any additional parameter context; it only mentions response fields (party, dates) that are not parameter-related. Baseline 3 applies.

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 specific verb ('Get') and resource ('full list of cosponsors for a bill'), and specifies the returned fields (party affiliation, sponsorship dates). It also explicitly contrasts with congress_bill_details, which provides only a summary, making the distinction precise.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description names congress_bill_details as an alternative and notes the key difference (individual details vs. summary), giving context for when this tool is more appropriate. However, it does not explicitly state when to use the alternative or mention other exclusions, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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