SignalTender B2B, GovCon & LegalTech MCP Server

Audit FAR Subpart 9.5 Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI) & Generate Mitigation Plan

generate_oci_mitigation_plan

Read-onlyIdempotent

Audit existing prime/subcontract awards (SETA, A&AS, IV&V, Systems Engineering, Cloud Architecture) against a target solicitation scope to detect Unequal Access to Information, Biased Ground Rules, and Impaired Objectivity under FAR Subpart 9.5 (FAR 9.505-1 through 9.505-4) and generate an OCI Risk Score (0-100), a 3-Pillar Case-Law Audit Matrix, an Organizational Firewall & NDA Control Matrix, and a ready-to-submit OCI Disclosure & Mitigation Plan volume. This is a read-only, stateless, non-destructive compliance and legal-engineering generator (requires X-RapidAPI-Key; new_solicitation_scope_and_oci_clauses accepts 20 to 45,000 characters and existing_contracts_and_corporate_relationships accepts 20 to 35,000 characters). Use this tool when auditing FAR 9.5 / DFARS 252.209-7008 / 252.209-7009 Organizational Conflicts of Interest or drafting an OCI Mitigation Plan & Non-Disclosure Firewall; use scan_far_dfars_clauses instead for general Section I FAR/DFARS flow-down clause scanning, or generate_teaming_strategy to structure 13 CFR 125.6 Prime/Sub workshare splits.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`target_solicitation_and_sow_text`	Yes	Full or excerpted target RFP scope, PWS/SOW tasks, Section H/I/K/L OCI disclosure instructions, and issuing agency/program office.
`current_and_prior_contracts_portfolio`	Yes	Summary of the bidder's (and any proposed subcontractor's) active or recent prime/sub contracts, SETA/A&AS/IV&V advisory roles, and access to nonpublic source-selection or proprietary third-party data.
`proposed_bidding_role_and_teaming_structure`	No	Bidder's pursuit structure ('Prime_Offeror', 'Subcontractor_or_Teaming_Partner', 'Joint_Venture_or_Mentor_Protege', or 'SETA_or_A_and_AS_Incumbent_Pivoting_to_Development').	Prime_Offeror

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`overall_oci_determination`	No	Formal FAR Subpart 9.5 OCI risk determination and pursuit posture recommendation.
`executive_oci_risk_summary`	No	Executive legal and capture summary of the OCI audit findings for the Contracting Officer and Capture Director.
`three_pillar_far_9_5_audit_matrix`	No	Comprehensive audit across all three FAR Subpart 9.5 / GAO OCI pillars: Unequal Access to Information (FAR 9.505-4), Biased Ground Rules (FAR 9.505-1/9.505-2), and Impaired Objectivity (FAR 9.505-3).
`oci_clearance_and_defensibility_score`	No	0-100 score indicating how defensible the bidder's OCI posture and mitigation plan are against Contracting Officer exclusion or GAO bid protest.
`organizational_firewall_and_nda_controls`	No	Concrete organizational, technical (IT/GovCloud enclave), personnel NDA, and workshare carve-out controls.
`ready_to_submit_oci_mitigation_plan_narrative`	No	Complete, paste-ready Volume I / Section L Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Disclosure & Mitigation Plan narrative including a FAR 9.505-4 Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) template and Contracting Officer certification block.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed18 schema fields changedOct 29, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / current_and_prior_contracts_portfolio

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Summary of the bidder's (and any proposed subcontractor's) active or recent prime/sub contracts, SETA/A&AS/IV&V advisory roles, and access to nonpublic source-selection or proprietary third-party data.",
+  "maxLength": 35000,
+  "minLength": 20,
+  "type": "string"
+}

removedInput schema / properties / existing_contracts_and_corporate_relationships

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Current or recent Prime/Subcontract awards (SETA, A&AS, IV&V, Systems Engineering, Cloud/Cyber Operations), affiliate/parent corporate structure, and agency access held by the bidder or its teammates (20 to 35,000 characters).",
-  "maxLength": 35000,
-  "minLength": 20,
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / new_solicitation_scope_and_oci_clauses

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Target RFP/Task Order PWS/SOW scope, Section H/I/L Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) clauses (FAR 9.5, DFARS 252.209-7008/7009, agency OCI provisions), and evaluation roles (20 to 45,000 characters).",
-  "maxLength": 45000,
-  "minLength": 20,
-  "type": "string"
-}

addedInput schema / properties / proposed_bidding_role_and_teaming_structure

Added value: +{
+  "default": "Prime_Offeror",
+  "description": "Bidder's pursuit structure ('Prime_Offeror', 'Subcontractor_or_Teaming_Partner', 'Joint_Venture_or_Mentor_Protege', or 'SETA_or_A_and_AS_Incumbent_Pivoting_to_Development').",
+  "enum": [
+    "Prime_Offeror",
+    "Subcontractor_or_Teaming_Partner",
+    "Joint_Venture_or_Mentor_Protege",
+    "SETA_or_A_and_AS_Incumbent_Pivoting_to_Development"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

removedInput schema / properties / proposed_mitigation_posture

Removed value: -{
-  "default": "Auto_Recommend",
-  "description": "Preferred OCI mitigation posture: 'Firewall_and_Subcontractor_Carveout' (firewalled enclave + independent subcontractor evaluation carve-out), 'Divestiture_or_Recusal_Protocol' (formal recusal from conflicting task orders), 'Affirmative_No_OCI_Certification' (formal no-OCI representation), or 'Auto_Recommend' (default).",
-  "enum": [
-    "Firewall_and_Subcontractor_Carveout",
-    "Divestiture_or_Recusal_Protocol",
-    "Affirmative_No_OCI_Certification",
-    "Auto_Recommend"
-  ],
-  "type": "string"
-}

addedInput schema / properties / target_solicitation_and_sow_text

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Full or excerpted target RFP scope, PWS/SOW tasks, Section H/I/K/L OCI disclosure instructions, and issuing agency/program office.",
+  "maxLength": 45000,
+  "minLength": 20,
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "new_solicitation_scope_and_oci_clauses",
-  "existing_contracts_and_corporate_relationships"
-]New value: +[
+  "target_solicitation_and_sow_text",
+  "current_and_prior_contracts_portfolio"
+]

removedOutput schema / properties / contracting_officer_disclosure_checklist

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Pre-submission OCI disclosure & representation checklist items.",
-  "items": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "type": "array"
-}

addedOutput schema / properties / executive_oci_risk_summary

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Executive legal and capture summary of the OCI audit findings for the Contracting Officer and Capture Director.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / executive_oci_summary

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Executive summary of the FAR Subpart 9.5 audit and mitigation strategy for the Contracting Officer.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedOutput schema / properties / firewall_and_compliance_controls

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Physical, logical, personnel, NDA, and subcontractor carve-out controls.",
-  "items": {
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "type": "array"
-}

addedOutput schema / properties / oci_clearance_and_defensibility_score

Added value: +{
+  "description": "0-100 score indicating how defensible the bidder's OCI posture and mitigation plan are against Contracting Officer exclusion or GAO bid protest.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / oci_overall_risk_score

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Quantitative FAR Subpart 9.5 OCI risk score from 0 (no OCI) to 100 (unmitigable OCI).",
-  "type": "integer"
-}

addedOutput schema / properties / organizational_firewall_and_nda_controls

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Concrete organizational, technical (IT/GovCloud enclave), personnel NDA, and workshare carve-out controls.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / overall_oci_determination / description

Previous value: -"Formal OCI determination (NO_OCI_DETECTED, MITIGABLE_VIA_FIREWALL_AND_RECUSAL, SUBCONTRACTOR_CARVEOUT_REQUIRED, HIGH_RISK_WAIVER_OR_DIVESTITURE)."New value: +"Formal FAR Subpart 9.5 OCI risk determination and pursuit posture recommendation."

changedOutput schema / properties / ready_to_submit_oci_mitigation_plan_narrative / description

Previous value: -"Complete, paste-ready OCI Disclosure & Mitigation Plan volume in Markdown."New value: +"Complete, paste-ready Volume I / Section L Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Disclosure & Mitigation Plan narrative including a FAR 9.505-4 Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) template and Contracting Officer certification block."

removedOutput schema / properties / three_pillar_far_9_5_audit

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "3-Pillar audit across Unequal Access to Information, Biased Ground Rules, and Impaired Objectivity with GAO/COFC precedents.",
-  "items": {
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "type": "array"
-}

addedOutput schema / properties / three_pillar_far_9_5_audit_matrix

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Comprehensive audit across all three FAR Subpart 9.5 / GAO OCI pillars: Unequal Access to Information (FAR 9.505-4), Biased Ground Rules (FAR 9.505-1/9.505-2), and Impaired Objectivity (FAR 9.505-3).",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

AddedOct 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the description's restatement of 'read-only, stateless, non-destructive' earns no credit. It does add genuinely new operational context: the X-RapidAPI-Key auth requirement and the input size envelopes (20–45,000 and 20–35,000 chars), which tell an agent about failure modes a caller must avoid.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and deliverables, which is good, but the opening is a single 70+ word run-on sentence and the second sentence packs auth, both length limits, and positioning against two siblings into another dense clause. The redundant annotation restatement and duplicated schema limits are sentences that don't earn their place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and the two required text inputs are thoroughly described in the schema itself. The description covers the regulatory domain, prerequisites, input ceilings, and sibling routing. The main gap is the misnamed parameters, which could mislead an agent filling the call.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description actively degrades it: it refers to parameters as `new_solicitation_scope_and_oci_clauses` and `existing_contracts_and_corporate_relationships`, which do not exist in the schema (actual names are `target_solicitation_and_sow_text` and `current_and_prior_contracts_portfolio`). The character limits it cites are already in the schema's minLength/maxLength, and the third enum parameter is never mentioned.

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 and resource ('Audit existing prime/subcontract awards against a target solicitation scope') plus the exact regulatory basis (FAR 9.505-1 through 9.505-4) and the concrete deliverables produced. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like scan_far_dfars_clauses and generate_teaming_strategy, which it names explicitly.

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 it ('auditing FAR 9.5 / DFARS 252.209-7008 / 252.209-7009 OCI or drafting an OCI Mitigation Plan & NDA Firewall') and routes to two named alternatives with the conditions that select them. This is about as clear as when/when-not guidance gets.

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.