Skip to main content
Glama

search_opm_pay

Search GS pay by locality area

Return the latest pay tables whose locality area matches every word of q: each word must be contained in the area name, case-insensitively, or equal its code. grade and step narrow the rates. No match returns an empty results list.

Matching only looks at OPM's locality area names, not at the counties and towns each area covers: naperville finds Chicago because the name contains it, while a town missing from the names returns nothing. No match does not mean the place falls under Rest of U.S.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesWords to find in the locality area name or code, all required, case-insensitive.
stepNoReturn only this step, 1 to 10.
gradeNoReturn only this GS grade, 1 to 15.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses latest-table selection, empty results on no match, and the important caveat that no match does not mean Rest of U.S.; it omits read-only/auth/rate-limit details and result ordering.

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?

Front-loads the purpose, then matching rules, then a caveat. Three short paragraphs with no filler, though the 'No match' behavior is restated in different forms.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, but the description covers purpose, input matching, empty-result behavior, and a key semantic caveat. It leaves result fields and ordering unstated, which is a minor gap for a search tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema: every q word must match case-insensitively in the area name or code, and grade/step narrow the returned rates.

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 ('Search') and resource ('GS pay by locality area'), and clarifies it returns the latest pay tables. It does not explicitly name the sibling get_opm_pay or get_opm_localities, so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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?

Explains how q matching works and warns that county/town coverage is not searched, but never states when to use this tool instead of get_opm_pay or get_opm_localities. Usage is implied rather than explicitly routed.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources