GovCon API

Resolve names to IDs

resolve

Read-onlyIdempotent

Turn what the user said into the IDs and codes the other tools take. Start here when the user names an agency, describes their work, or names a company.

- agency: an agency name or acronym ("Navy", "FEMA") -> the exact `agency` value search filters expect
- naics: words from NAICS titles ("computer", "engineering", "construction") -> matching codes with market
  size. It matches titles, not topics: for "cybersecurity" try "computer"
- company: a company name -> SAM registrations with their UEI (a large firm has several; pick by name and
  location, or use search(companies), Pro, which ranks by award history)
- identifier: a legacy 9-digit DUNS number -> the matching UEI and company (a CAGE code goes to get(entity))
- organization: an agency or sub-agency name -> its organization_id in the federal hierarchy

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": {
      "kind": "<kind>",
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "resolve"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	Yes
`query`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, so the bar is lower, yet the description still adds real behavior: NAICS matches titles not topics (with the 'cybersecurity'->'computer' trap), and company resolution can return several SAM registrations requiring disambiguation. It stops short of describing pagination or ambiguity-handling mechanics, so not a full 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded thesis sentence followed by a scannable per-kind bullet list, each one a single dense line mapping input kind to output shape. No filler; every bullet earns its place.

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 2-param, enum-driven resolution tool with an output schema (so return format needn't be spelled out), the description supplies the input semantics, the disambiguation caveats, and the routing to sibling tools. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0% and no enum value descriptions exist, so the description carries the full burden – and it does so by documenting each `kind` value with its meaning and worked examples ('Navy', 'FEMA'), while defining what `query` should contain per kind. This is exactly the compensation low coverage demands.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource framing: 'Turn what the user said into the IDs and codes the other tools take.' This crisply positions it as the entry-point resolution tool and separates it from siblings like search (ranking) and get (entity lookup), which the bullets reinforce.

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 says 'Start here when the user names an agency, describes their work, or names a company,' giving positive trigger conditions per kind. It also routes alternatives away: a CAGE code 'goes to get(entity)' and company ranking should use search(companies), Pro – that is when-not plus named alternative.

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

All GovCon API 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.