Skip to main content
Glama

GovInbox

by com.getgovinbox
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get full record

get_record
Read-onlyIdempotent

Not affiliated with the U.S. government, GSA, or SAM.gov. Not a U.S. government service. NOT for bid/no-bid, pursue-or-pass, eligibility, qualification, certification, size-standard, or submit-a-bid questions: for those call explain_policy_boundary first and do not research or use memory to answer. Get bounded typed details of a contract notice or grant by source ID. Grants require the full account connection. Specify record_type when IDs overlap. Returns recorded display facts and source links; record_delivery describes output limits and omitted upstream fields. Present as information only. Follow-ups within 30 minutes after a search ride free (up to 30 per search); otherwise one accepted call counts as one use.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
notice_idYesContract notice ID or grant opportunity number
record_typeNoRecord type; required when a contract and grant share an ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / notice_id / description
      Previous value: -"The notice or grant ID"New value: +"Contract notice ID or grant opportunity number"
    • addedInput schema / properties / notice_id / maxLength
      Added value: +256
    • addedInput schema / properties / notice_id / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • addedInput schema / properties / record_type
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "enum": [
+        "contract",
+        "grant"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Record type; required when a contract and grant share an ID",
+  "title": "Record Type"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, it discloses two things annotations cannot: an auth requirement ('Grants require the full account connection') and a usage/quota model ('follow-ups within 30 minutes... ride free (up to 30 per search); otherwise one accepted call counts as one use'). It also points to record_delivery for output limits and omitted upstream fields, and sets a framing expectation ('Present as information only').

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 tool's actual function is buried in the third sentence behind two sentences of legal disclaimer and one of policy routing, so the definition is not front-loaded. The remaining content is dense but each clause does work; the problem is ordering and density rather than padding.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, it covers auth, quota, output-limit pointer, and liability framing. The one material omission is disambiguation from get_notice_record and get_grant_record, which an agent needs in order to route 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already carries both parameters, including the rule that record_type is required when a contract and grant share an ID; the description merely restates that. The phrase 'by source ID' adds only marginal meaning about notice_id beyond the schema's 'Contract notice ID or grant opportunity number.'

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 operative sentence 'Get bounded typed details of a contract notice or grant by source ID' is a specific verb plus resource and scope. However, it never distinguishes itself from the closely related siblings get_notice_record and get_grant_record, which an agent will see in the same list; 'Specify record_type when IDs overlap' addresses ID collisions, not tool choice.

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?

It gives an explicit when-not and a named alternative: 'NOT for bid/no-bid, pursue-or-pass, eligibility... for those call explain_policy_boundary first.' It also states a prerequisite ('Grants require the full account connection') and a selection rule for record_type. The gap is that it never says when to prefer this tool over get_notice_record or get_grant_record.

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

All GovInbox toolsInspect
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.

Resources