SiteCheck Trade & Energy

USDA weekly export sales report for a US farm commodity —

logistics_usda_ag_export_sales

Read-only

USDA weekly export sales report (FAS ESR) for a US farm commodity — corn, soybeans, wheat classes, sorghum, cotton, rice, soybean meal/oil, beef, pork and more: for one week of the marketing year, US totals and every destination's weekly exports, net new sales, outstanding sales, accumulated exports and total commitments, plus next-year sales; top buyers first. Units as reported (metric tons, running bales…). Related tools on this server, for a different need: energy_usda_wasde_crop_reports when you need USDA WASDE figures for one commodity and region; logistics_export_license_ear99 when you need to search the US Export Administration Regulations text. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "commodity": "<commodity>"
    },
    "name": "logistics_usda_ag_export_sales"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`week`	No	Week ending date YYYY-MM-DD (a Thursday). Default: the latest released week
`limit`	No	Max destination rows, 1-200 (default 20)
`country`	No	Optional destination filter, e.g. Mexico, Japan
`commodity`	Yes	Commodity name or ESR code, e.g. corn, soybeans, all wheat, sorghum, all upland cotton, pork, 401
`marketYear`	No	Marketing year as USDA numbers it (e.g. 2027 for corn Sep 2026-Aug 2027). Default: the current one

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`unit`	No
`count`	No
`source`	No
`released`	No
`usTotals`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`commodity`	No
`marketYear`	No
`weekEnding`	No
`destinations`	No
`commodityCode`	No
`marketYearEnd`	No
`weeksAvailable`	No
`marketYearStart`	No
`destinationsReporting`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 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=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds genuinely non-structured behavior: x402 payment at $0.002 USDC per successful call, failed calls not charged, units as reported (metric tons, running bales), and destination ranking with top buyers first. It does not discuss latency or empty-week handling, but the paid-call economics are the critical disclosure and are present.

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 payload, then deduplicated alternatives, then pricing. The opening sentence is dense but every clause (measures, units, ordering) carries information; the only mild cost is length before the agent reaches the alternative-tool guidance.

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 shape need not be described, and the description still covers scope, units, ordering, payment terms and sibling routing. Sufficient for correct invocation; minor gaps (behavior on a holiday/non-Thursday week or an unavailable market year) are covered adequately by the schema defaults.

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 the schema already documents week format, limit range, country filter, commodity codes and marketYear defaults. The description reinforces semantics only lightly — 'units as reported' and 'top buyers first' imply how limit/country interact with ordering, but no parameter-specific behavior is added beyond the schema.

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 dataset (USDA FAS weekly export sales report) with an explicit commodity scope (corn, soybeans, wheat classes, cotton, rice, meals/oils, beef, pork) and enumerates the exact measures returned (weekly exports, net new sales, outstanding sales, accumulated exports, total commitments, next-year sales). An agent can distinguish it from the WASDE and EAR siblings without opening the schema.

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 routes two adjacent needs to other tools: energy_usda_wasde_crop_reports for WASDE figures per commodity/region and logistics_export_license_ear99 for EAR text search. It does not give an explicit negative condition (e.g. when to prefer spot/futures siblings like energy_cme_agri_spot_futures), so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.

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

All SiteCheck Trade & Energy 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?