pulsenetwork

grantpulse

GrantPulse: The funding-discovery layer for organisations anywhere — official sources fetched live: Grants.gov, the EU Funding & Tenders Portal (SEDIA), gov.uk Find a Grant, USAspending, IRS Form 990s. Match open calls to your profile (US federal/state, EU $0.25, UK $0.25, global development), check funders' real giving history, draft proposal sections and complete ready-to-send Letters of Inquiry ($2). 14 endpoints.

Coverage: Global

Endpoints: • match ($0.15): Personalized grant matching • federal ($0.10): Federal grant search • state ($0.10): State grant programs • foundation ($0.12): Foundation grant intelligence • eligibility ($0.10): Grant eligibility analysis • apply ($0.15): Grant application strategy • deadline ($0.08): Grant deadline tracker • writer ($0.20): Grant narrative drafting • eu ($0.25): EU funding intelligence • global ($0.15): Global development funding • org-intel ($0.20): Nonprofit financial intelligence (IRS Form 990) • funder-990 ($0.25): Private foundation giving intelligence (IRS Form 990-PF) • uk ($0.25): Match UK grants from the official gov.uk Find a Grant service • loi ($2.00): Draft a complete ready-to-send Letter of Inquiry • loi-readiness ($0.25): Deterministic $0.25 readiness check for the LOI product

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ein`	No	9-digit EIN. Usable alone (financials are EIN-indexed nationwide) or with state for BMF registration detail.
`org`	No	who you are — type, track record, location
`days`	No	days
`lang`	No	lang
`size`	No	size
`state`	No	state
`action`	Yes	Which endpoint to call. Options: match \| federal \| state \| foundation \| eligibility \| apply \| deadline \| writer \| eu \| global \| org-intel \| funder-990 \| uk \| loi \| loi-readiness
`agency`	No	agency
`amount`	No	ask size, e.g. 75000 USD
`funder`	No	the foundation/programme being approached
`nation`	No	England \| Scotland \| Wales \| Northern Ireland
`sector`	No	arts \| health \| education \| environment \| technology \| agriculture \| community \| housing \| science
`country`	No	EU member state
`keyword`	No	keyword
`mission`	No	mission
`project`	No	what you want funded
`section`	No	section
`category`	No	category
`duration`	No	e.g. 2 years
`location`	No	location
`org_name`	No	Organization legal name. Requires state.
`org_type`	No	nonprofit \| small_business \| individual \| public_university \| private_university \| state_government \| local_government \| tribal \| for_profit \| other
`grant_name`	No	grant_name
`eligibility`	No	eligibility
`org_profile`	No	org_profile
`org_description`	No	org_description
`project_description`	No	project_description

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedJul 25, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / action / description

Previous value: -"Which endpoint to call. Options: match | federal | state | foundation | eligibility | apply | deadline | writer | eu | global | org-intel | funder-990 | uk | loi"New value: +"Which endpoint to call. Options: match | federal | state | foundation | eligibility | apply | deadline | writer | eu | global | org-intel | funder-990 | uk | loi | loi-readiness"

changedInput schema / properties / action / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "match",
-  "federal",
-  "state",
-  "foundation",
-  "eligibility",
-  "apply",
-  "deadline",
-  "writer",
-  "eu",
-  "global",
-  "org-intel",
-  "funder-990",
-  "uk",
-  "loi"
-]New value: +[
+  "match",
+  "federal",
+  "state",
+  "foundation",
+  "eligibility",
+  "apply",
+  "deadline",
+  "writer",
+  "eu",
+  "global",
+  "org-intel",
+  "funder-990",
+  "uk",
+  "loi",
+  "loi-readiness"
+]

Changed8 schema fields changedJul 11, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / action / description

Previous value: -"Which endpoint to call. Options: match | federal | state | foundation | eligibility | apply | deadline | writer | eu | global | org-intel | funder-990"New value: +"Which endpoint to call. Options: match | federal | state | foundation | eligibility | apply | deadline | writer | eu | global | org-intel | funder-990 | uk | loi"

changedInput schema / properties / action / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "match",
-  "federal",
-  "state",
-  "foundation",
-  "eligibility",
-  "apply",
-  "deadline",
-  "writer",
-  "eu",
-  "global",
-  "org-intel",
-  "funder-990"
-]New value: +[
+  "match",
+  "federal",
+  "state",
+  "foundation",
+  "eligibility",
+  "apply",
+  "deadline",
+  "writer",
+  "eu",
+  "global",
+  "org-intel",
+  "funder-990",
+  "uk",
+  "loi"
+]

addedInput schema / properties / amount

Added value: +{
+  "description": "ask size, e.g. 75000 USD",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / duration

Added value: +{
+  "description": "e.g. 2 years",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / funder

Added value: +{
+  "description": "the foundation/programme being approached",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / nation

Added value: +{
+  "description": "England | Scotland | Wales | Northern Ireland",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / org

Added value: +{
+  "description": "who you are — type, track record, location",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / project

Added value: +{
+  "description": "what you want funded",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedJul 6, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior, and it does add useful context: it states that data is 'fetched live' from official sources and lists per-endpoint pricing (e.g., 'loi ($2.00)'), which is relevant for cost awareness. However, it does not mention whether operations are read-only, any rate limits, response formats, or error behaviors. It also contains a factual inconsistency by claiming '14 endpoints' while listing 15, which undermines reliability.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is overly long, essentially a marketing brochure with a bullet list of all endpoints and prices. Much of this information is redundant with the input schema's action enum and parameter descriptions, and the opening sentence is a dense, run-on pitch. It also contains a factual error ('14 endpoints' vs. the 15 enumerated), which further diminishes clarity. The structure is organized, but it does not earn its length for tool selection and invocation purposes.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 27 parameters, 15 sub-actions, and no output schema, the description should provide operational guidance on parameter usage per endpoint and expected return values. It does none of this: no mapping of parameters to actions, no examples, no mention of response structure or pagination. The high-level catalog of endpoints is a starting point but falls well short of what an AI agent needs to reliably invoke this complex tool.

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?

All 27 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is met. The tool description adds value by enriching the 'action' parameter with endpoint-specific phrases, but many other parameter descriptions are tautological placeholders (e.g., 'days' -> 'days', 'keyword' -> 'keyword') and the narrative does not elaborate on them. For a tool with many optional parameters, the description does not clarify which parameters are relevant for which action, so it only partially improves understanding.

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 clearly identifies the tool as a funding-discovery service with specific capabilities: searching official grant sources, matching to profiles, analyzing eligibility, drafting proposals, and preparing LOIs. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by naming its domain (grants/funding) and enumerating distinct sub-actions. However, it lacks a compact verb+resource statement, instead using a promotional overview, so it does not fully achieve a crisp purpose declaration.

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 provides per-endpoint one-line descriptions (e.g., 'match: Personalized grant matching', 'uk: Match UK grants from the official gov.uk Find a Grant service'), giving some usage guidance for each sub-action. However, it never states when to use grantpulse as a whole versus alternative sibling tools, and it does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or recommended parameter combinations. The guidance is implied rather than explicitly framed around decision-making.

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

All pulsenetwork 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.

grantpulse

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

Resources