USASpending.gov

get_state_profile

Read-only

Get the federal award totals for recipients located in a US state.

Examples: '06' = California, '48' = Texas, '24' = Maryland, '51' = Virginia.
Returns one summary: state name and code, total_prime_amount and
total_prime_awards (all award types together), loan face value,
award_amount_per_capita, total_outlays, and population / median household
income (older Census vintages: see pop_year and mhi_year). It has no
breakdown by agency, recipient or district; for those use
spending_by_geography() or spending_by_category() with a time window.

year: a fiscal year like 2026, 'all' (every year on file) or 'latest'
(USAspending's own default: the current fiscal year to date, which right
after October 1 holds only a few days of data). Defaults to the last
completed fiscal year. The answer always carries fiscal_year.

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": {
      "state_fips": "<state_fips>"
    },
    "name": "get_state_profile"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`year`	No
`state_fips`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a safe read-only, open-world operation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: the default year, the caveat about 'latest' returning only current fiscal-year-to-date data, and that the answer always includes fiscal_year. It does not cover auth/rate-limit behavior, but that is less central for this read-only endpoint.

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?

The description is front-loaded with purpose, examples, and scope exclusions, then parameter semantics. The return-field enumeration is somewhat redundant because an output schema exists, but it adds a few nuances such as 'all award types together' and Census vintage references.

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?

Given two parameters, zero schema descriptions, and an existing output schema, the description supplies the missing purpose, parameter semantics, alternatives, and key behavioral caveats. An agent has enough information to select and call the tool correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It does so with concrete state FIPS examples ('06'=California, '48'=Texas) and a full explanation of year values including 'all', 'latest', the default, and the October 1 caveat.

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 opening sentence states a specific verb and resource — federal award totals for recipients in a US state — and later narrows the scope by saying it has no agency/recipient/district breakdown. This lets an agent distinguish it from spending_by_geography and spending_by_category.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly says when to use this tool versus alternatives: for state-level totals, and for breakdowns use spending_by_geography() or spending_by_category() with a time window. It also documents FIPS examples and the year modes, leaving little to infer.

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

All USASpending.gov tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.