Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SignalTender B2B, GovCon & LegalTech MCP Server

by io.github.aarbchen
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

FAR 6.302 / FAR 8.405-6 Sole-Source Justification & Approval (J&A / LSJ) Drafter

generate_justification_ja_sole_source
Read-onlyIdempotent

Draft a complete 12-Part FAR 6.303-2 Justification & Approval (J&A), FAR 8.405-6 Limited Sources Justification (LSJ), or FAR 16.505(b)(2) Fair Opportunity Exception package for Contracting Officers. Returns a strictly validated SoleSourceJaResponse JSON object containing statutory_exception_overview, far_6_303_2_twelve_part_ja_sections, unacceptable_delay_and_duplicative_cost_quantification, and sam_gov_posting_and_approval_routing grounded in FAR 6.302-1 (10 U.S.C. § 3204(a)(1) / 41 U.S.C. § 3304(a)(1)), FAR 6.303-2 (12 Mandatory Content Elements), & FAR 8.405-6 / 16.505(b)(2). This is a read-only, stateless, non-destructive GovCon compliance and capture analysis call (requires X-RapidAPI-Key or X-SignalTender-Key; sole_source_requirement_and_vendor_uniqueness_text accepts 15 to 45,000 characters, while statutory_authority_pathway and estimated_dollar_value_and_approval_tier calibrate the regulatory regime and threshold assumptions). Use this tool when executing FAR 6.302 / FAR 8.405-6 Sole-Source Justification & Approval (J&A / LSJ) Drafter 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

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statutory_authority_pathwayNoTarget regulatory regime, statutory authority, or evaluation framework (defaults to 'FAR_6_302_1_Only_One_Responsible_Source_10_USC_3204_a_1').FAR_6_302_1_Only_One_Responsible_Source_10_USC_3204_a_1
estimated_dollar_value_and_approval_tierNoOperational context, threshold parameters, or compliance posture assumptions (defaults to '$18.5M Total Estimated Value — Competition Advocate Approval Tier ($750K to $15M / $20M DoD PEO/HCA Threshold)').$18.5M Total Estimated Value — Competition Advocate Approval Tier ($750K to $15M / $20M DoD PEO/HCA Threshold)
sole_source_requirement_and_vendor_uniqueness_textYesPrimary solicitation text, clause excerpts, deliverable schedule, or technical/financial context for FAR 6.302 / FAR 8.405-6 Sole-Source Justification & Approval (J&A / LSJ) Drafter (15 to 45,000 characters).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusNoExecution status ('success').
statutory_exception_overviewNoExecutive determination overview, regulatory citations, and readiness score.
far_6_303_2_twelve_part_ja_sectionsNoStructured line-by-line regulatory audit, classification, or quantitative schedule rows.
sam_gov_posting_and_approval_routingNoStatutory governance protocol and actionable submission verification checklist.
unacceptable_delay_and_duplicative_cost_quantificationNoPaste-ready compliance narratives, control specifications, or submission sections.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful context beyond annotations: stateless behavior, API-key requirement, input length constraint, and the returned response structure. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 key routing and constraints are front-loaded, but the description is a dense run-on that repeats the full tool title, lists response field names that the output schema already covers, and stacks legal citations. It is informative but not efficiently structured.

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?

For a complex regulatory drafting tool, the description covers purpose, alternatives, authentication, input constraints, and output shape. Since an output schema exists, it does not need to explain return values in more detail, but it still names the key response fields.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds semantic context by explaining that the statutory-authority parameter calibrates the regulatory regime and the dollar-value parameter calibrates approval-threshold assumptions, plus the 15-to-45,000-character input range.

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 drafting action and names the exact regulatory artifacts: FAR 6.303-2 J&A, FAR 8.405-6 LSJ, and FAR 16.505(b)(2) exception package. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools such as scan_far_dfars_clauses and generate_compliance_matrix.

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 explicit alternative tools and the conditions that select them: use scan_far_dfars_clauses for FAR/DFARS clause flow-down audits and generate_compliance_matrix for Section L/M extraction. The phrase 'use this tool when executing ... workflows' is somewhat tautological, but the sibling routing guidance is clear.

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 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