Skip to main content
Glama
okfn
by okfn

mcp_iati_list_reporting_organisations

List reporting organisations from loaded IATI data, showing their reference, name, and number of activities reported. Identify publishers responsible for maintaining activity data.

Instructions

List the organisations that report activities in the loaded IATI data.

    The reporting organisation is responsible for publishing and
    maintaining the activity data. It is not necessarily the funding
    or implementing organisation.

    Returns:
        A table containing the organisation reference, name and number
        of activities reported.

    Relevant IATI terms:
    - Reporting organisation: Organisation responsible for publishing and maintaining an activity's data; not necessarily the one funding or implementing the project.
  • IATI activity: A development or cooperation intervention published under the IATI standard; it can represent a project, a programme or another unit of work.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoPlain text message that bypasses LLM processing and should be printed exactly as provided in the user interface.
tableNoTwo-dimensional list (list of rows) representing tabular data, e.g., from CSV or TSV sources. Each row should be a list of cell values.
chartsNoList of dictionaries containing data and configuration for rendering a Chart.js chart in the chat interface.
sourcesYesURL(s) that users can nagivate to to download the data used for the analysis. E.g., landing page, feed, file endpoint, CKAN resource page, etc.
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool returns a table containing organisation reference, name, and number of activities reported, and it clarifies an important conceptual nuance about reporting organisations. This is adequate for a simple read-only list with no parameters, although it omits minor details like ordering or whether the list is complete.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The main sentence is direct and front-loaded, and the return-format section is useful. However, the 'Relevant IATI terms' section repeats the reporting-organisation definition almost verbatim from the earlier paragraph, and the IATI activity definition is not necessary for invoking this tool. The structure is clear but the content could be tightened.

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 zero-parameter tool with an output schema already present, the description supplies the needed context: it names the data source, the return shape, and the distinguishing concept of reporting organisations. Nothing essential for selecting or invoking this tool appears to be missing, though it could have been more concise.

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 has zero parameters, so the input schema already fully covers the invocation surface; the description does not need to explain parameters. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is therefore strong, and the description adds no irrelevant parameter information.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List the organisations that report activities in the loaded IATI data.' It also clarifies the reporting-organisation concept by distinguishing it from funding and implementing organisations, which helps narrow the tool's meaning. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as transaction_totals_by_organisation, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description conveys that this tool is for reporting organisations and that these are not necessarily funding or implementing organisations, which gives useful context for choosing it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so the usage guidance is more implied than explicit.

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/okfn/mcp-iati'

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