lobbywatch-mcp

by malkreide

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Remote

lobbywatch_dump_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check the current Lobbywatch dump cache status to see data freshness and last load time without forcing a refresh.

Instructions

Return current dump cache status without forcing a refresh.

Use cases: - "How fresh is the cached data right now?" - "When was the dump last loaded?"

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`stale`	No	Set only when the dump could not be refreshed and an older cached copy answered instead. The data may miss changes made since `stale.cached_at` — say so when relaying it.
`loaded`	Yes
`source`	No		Data: Lobbywatch.ch — CC BY-SA 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Not an official register; community-researched records.
`cached_at`	No
`provenance`	Yes	Which endpoint / dump the payload came from
`age_seconds`	No
`record_count`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.3.8Oct 15, 2026

addedOutput schema / $defs

Added value: +{
+  "StaleDump": {
+    "description": "The weekly dump could not be refreshed; an older cached copy answered.",
+    "properties": {
+      "age_seconds": {
+        "description": "Age of the answering copy",
+        "title": "Age Seconds",
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "cached_at": {
+        "description": "When the answering copy was downloaded (UTC, ISO 8601)",
+        "title": "Cached At",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "reason": {
+        "description": "Why the refresh failed",
+        "title": "Reason",
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "cached_at",
+      "age_seconds",
+      "reason"
+    ],
+    "title": "StaleDump",
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / stale

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/StaleDump"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Set only when the dump could not be refreshed and an older cached copy answered instead. The data may miss changes made since `stale.cached_at` — say so when relaying it."
+}

First observedv0.3.1Jun 3, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the 'without forcing a refresh' constraint, which is useful but modest given annotations carry the main behavioral burden.

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?

Front-loaded one-line purpose followed by two tightly scoped use-case bullets; every line earns its place with zero filler or restatement of the title.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations fully cover the read-only/idempotent safety profile. For a zero-parameter status read, nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to document and no ambiguity for an agent to resolve. Baseline of 4 applies for a no-argument tool.

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?

States a specific verb (Return) and resource (dump cache status), and the qualifier 'without forcing a refresh' distinguishes it from the mutation-oriented sibling lobbywatch_refresh_dump. It stops short of naming that sibling explicitly, but the scope is unambiguous.

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?

Provides concrete use cases ('How fresh is the cached data?' / 'When was the dump last loaded?') and an implicit when-not via 'without forcing a refresh'. Clear usage context, though it never names lobbywatch_refresh_dump as the alternative for forcing a reload.

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

Deploy Server