SiteCheck Company Records

US federal prevailing wage determinations from SAM.gov

gov_sam_gov_wage_determinations

Read-only

US federal prevailing wage determinations from SAM.gov (Department of Labor). Search active Davis-Bacon (construction) or Service Contract Act determinations by state, county or text, or open one determination (e.g. TX20260253 or 2015-5245) to get every classification with its hourly rate and fringe benefit, the counties covered, construction type, revision and publish date. Related tools on this server, for a different need: gov_grants_gov when you need US federal grant opportunities from Grants.gov: opportunity; gov_us_gov_contract_watch when you need Largest US federal contract awards from USAspending.gov. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "gov_sam_gov_wage_determinations"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`wd`	No	One determination number: Davis-Bacon like TX20260253, SCA like 2015-5245. Returns its rates
`type`	No	Search: dba = Davis-Bacon construction (default), sca = Service Contract Act, cba = collective bargaining
`limit`	No	Search results 1-50 (default 10)
`query`	No	Search text, e.g. a county name (Harris) or a service (janitorial)
`state`	No	Search: 2-letter state, e.g. TX
`occupation`	No	With wd: keep only classifications containing this text, e.g. electrician

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`wd`	No
`url`	No
`rates`	No
`active`	No
`source`	No
`document`	No
`revision`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`locations`	No
`published`	No
`rateCount`	No
`constructionType`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the per-call price of $0.002 USDC via x402 on specific chains and that failed calls are not charged. It does not discuss pagination, rate limits, or how far the coverage/currency of the determinations extends.

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?

Front-loaded with the resource and the two operating modes, and the payment note is a clean trailing sentence. It is a single dense paragraph; the embedded sibling-tool blurbs ('...from Grants.gov: opportunity') carry redundant detail that could be trimmed.

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?

For a read-only, open-world lookup with a full schema and an output schema, the description covers mode selection, returned fields, and the billing model. Minor gaps: the 'cba' (collective bargaining) type and 'occupation' filtering are never mentioned, so an agent scanning only the prose would miss part of the capability surface.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented with examples in the schema; the description mostly restates the search dimensions. It omits mention of the 'cba' enumeration value and the 'occupation' filter, so it adds essentially no meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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: search Davis-Bacon/SCA prevailing wage determinations or open a single determination by number. It names the source (SAM.gov / Department of Labor) and enumerates exactly what a lookup returns (classifications, hourly rate, fringe, counties, construction type, revision, publish date), which no sibling tool covers.

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?

Explicitly distinguishes the two modes (search by state/county/text vs. fetch one by wd number) and names two sibling tools to use 'for a different need', which is real routing guidance. Those siblings are adjacent domains rather than true alternatives for the same task, so the when-not guidance is partial rather than exhaustive.

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

All SiteCheck Company Records 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.

Resources

Need Help?