Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

mcp-server

by com.interzoid
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

interzoid_gov_contracts

Read-onlyIdempotent

US federal government contracts for any company: lifetime and trailing-twelve-month contract value, top awarding agencies, active contract vehicles, set-aside status, recent major awards, prime and subcontract mix, top NAICS codes, CAGE code, and a SAM.gov reference. For GovCon sales, competitive analysis, teaming partner research, and due diligence. Cost: $0.25 USDC via x402.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lookupYesCompany name to retrieve government contract data for
languageNoOptional. Two-letter code for results in that language (default English): fr, de, it, es, ja, pt, zh, ar, nl, el, tr, ko, sv, vi, th, id. Same price in every language.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / language
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. Two-letter code for results in that language (default English): fr, de, it, es, ja, pt, zh, ar, nl, el, tr, ko, sv, vi, th, id. Same price in every language.",
+  "enum": [
+    "fr",
+    "de",
+    "it",
+    "es",
+    "ja",
+    "pt",
+    "zh",
+    "ar",
+    "nl",
+    "el",
+    "tr",
+    "ko",
+    "sv",
+    "vi",
+    "th",
+    "id"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / lookup / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "Lockheed Martin"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld, so the description's added value is the $0.25 USDC x402 pricing and the fixed data-source scope (SAM.gov, CAGE). That pricing and sourcing detail is exactly the extra behavioral context an agent needs; it stops short of stating behavior on unmatched companies or data freshness.

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?

One dense field-enumeration sentence, then use cases, then cost – front-loaded and free of filler. Every clause conveys either returned data or a decision-relevant fact.

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?

With no output schema, enumerating returned fields is essential and done well, and cost is disclosed. Minor gaps: no note on empty/no-match results, US-only jurisdiction is implied but not called out, and the language option is unacknowledged.

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 both parameters (lookup, language) are already documented. The description adds nothing about expected lookup format (legal name vs. trade name) and never mentions the multilingual option, so it neither helps nor hurts beyond the schema baseline.

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?

States a specific verb-resource pair ('US federal government contracts for any company') and enumerates the exact data returned (lifetime/TTM value, awarding agencies, set-asides, NAICS, CAGE). This clearly separates it from siblings like interzoid_private_company_deal_intel or interzoid_competitor_analysis.

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?

Names concrete use cases: GovCon sales, competitive analysis, teaming partner research, due diligence. It gives clear context for when to reach for it, but offers no explicit exclusions or pointers to which sibling to use instead (e.g. deal intel vs. contracts).

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

All mcp-server 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