SignalTender B2B, GovCon & LegalTech MCP Server

Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI / 32 CFR 2002 & DoDI 5200.48) Handling Plan

generate_cui_marking_distribution_plan

Read-onlyIdempotent

Analyze deliverables against the NARA CUI Registry, 32 CFR Part 2002, and DoDI 5200.48 to generate exact CUI banner/portion markings, DoD Distribution Statements (A–F), and a CUI Sanitization & Spill Response SOP. Returns a strictly validated CuiMarkingPlanResponse JSON object containing cui_registry_governance_overview, deliverable_cui_banner_and_distribution_matrix, portion_marking_and_designation_indicator_blocks, and nist_800_88_sanitization_and_spill_response_sop grounded in 32 CFR Part 2002 (NARA CUI Program), DoDI 5200.48 (Controlled Unclassified Information), DoDI 5230.24 (Distribution Statements), & NIST SP 800-88 Rev. 1. This is a read-only, stateless, non-destructive GovCon compliance and capture analysis call (requires X-RapidAPI-Key or X-SignalTender-Key; deliverables_and_security_classification_guide_text accepts 15 to 45,000 characters, while cui_authority_framework and controlling_dod_office_and_ldc_context calibrate the regulatory regime and threshold assumptions). Use this tool when executing Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI / 32 CFR 2002 & DoDI 5200.48) Handling Plan workflows; use scan_far_dfars_clauses instead for general FAR/DFARS clause flow-down audits, or generate_compliance_matrix for general Section L/M 'shall' requirement extraction.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cui_authority_framework`	No	Target regulatory regime, statutory authority, or evaluation framework (defaults to '32_CFR_Part_2002_NARA_CUI_Registry_DoDI_5200_48_And_DoDI_5230_24_Distribution_Statements').	32_CFR_Part_2002_NARA_CUI_Registry_DoDI_5200_48_And_DoDI_5230_24_Distribution_Statements
`controlling_dod_office_and_ldc_context`	No	Operational context, threshold parameters, or compliance posture assumptions (defaults to 'Controlling DoD Office: AFLCMC/HNC (Hanscom AFB, MA) \| Limited Dissemination Controls: NOFORN, FEDCON, DL ONLY').	Controlling DoD Office: AFLCMC/HNC (Hanscom AFB, MA) \| Limited Dissemination Controls: NOFORN, FEDCON, DL ONLY
`deliverables_and_security_classification_guide_text`	Yes	Primary solicitation text, clause excerpts, deliverable schedule, or technical/financial context for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI / 32 CFR 2002 & DoDI 5200.48) Handling Plan (15 to 45,000 characters).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`status`	No	Execution status ('success').
`cui_registry_governance_overview`	No	Executive determination overview, regulatory citations, and readiness score.
`deliverable_cui_banner_and_distribution_matrix`	No	Structured line-by-line regulatory audit, classification, or quantitative schedule rows.
`nist_800_88_sanitization_and_spill_response_sop`	No	Statutory governance protocol and actionable submission verification checklist.
`portion_marking_and_designation_indicator_blocks`	No	Paste-ready compliance narratives, control specifications, or submission sections.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (read-only, non-destructive, idempotent), the description adds critical context: it is stateless, requires an X-RapidAPI-Key or X-SignalTender-Key, enforces input character limits, returns a strictly validated `CuiMarkingPlanResponse` JSON object with named sections, and describes how the auxiliary parameters calibrate the analysis. No contradictions with annotations.

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 purpose is front-loaded and the structure is logical: purpose, output fields, legal grounding, behavioral traits, and usage alternatives. However, the description is lengthy and repeats the same regulatory citations (32 CFR Part 2002, DoDI 5200.48) multiple times, which slightly dilutes conciseness.

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 the tool's complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description still provides everything an agent needs: purpose, output structure, input roles, authentication requirements, character limits, stateless behavior, and clear sibling alternatives. Nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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 documents parameter purposes, defaults, and min/max lengths. The description adds only a vague note that `cui_authority_framework` and `controlling_dod_office_and_ldc_context` 'calibrate the regulatory regime and threshold assumptions,' which largely duplicates the schema's descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 description states a specific verb (analyze) and resource (deliverables against CUI regulations), then names the exact artifacts produced: CUI banner/portion markings, DoD Distribution Statements (A–F), and a CUI Sanitization & Spill Response SOP. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by naming `scan_far_dfars_clauses` and `generate_compliance_matrix` as alternatives for different scopes.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Use this tool when executing Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI / 32 CFR 2002 & DoDI 5200.48) Handling Plan workflows.' It then names two sibling alternatives and the specific cases where each should be used instead, leaving no ambiguity about routing.

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

All SignalTender B2B, GovCon & LegalTech MCP Server 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.