Skip to main content
Glama

Server Details

Search 30,000+ decided U.S. DOHA security-clearance decisions, cited to the public record.

Status
Healthy
Last Tested
Transport
Streamable HTTP
URL

Glama MCP Gateway

Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.

MCP client
Glama
MCP server

Full call logging

Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.

Tool access control

Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.

Managed credentials

Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.

Usage analytics

See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.

100% free. Your data is private.

Tool Definition Quality

Score is being calculated. Check back soon.

Available Tools

7 tools
get_candor_outcomes
Read-only
Inspect

How cases with a candor allegation (falsification, omission, or lack of candor) were resolved in the decided record: the favorable rate with vs without such an allegation, when the judge found a deliberate falsification vs when the applicant rebutted it, and when the applicant corrected the record before being confronted. Counts and denominators throughout. Descriptive, never a prediction.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

get_caseA
Read-only
Inspect

Fetch one decided DOHA case in full: what was alleged, the judge's findings per allegation, per-guideline formal findings, outcome, judge, representation, and appeal history. Use case_id from search_cases.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
case_idYesThe numeric case id from search_cases
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. The description adds value by detailing the specific behavioral scope (what the full case includes) beyond the annotations, but does not mention any limitations or side effects.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no redundant information. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description comprehensively explains the return content (allegations, findings, outcome, appeal history), providing sufficient context for an agent to understand what to expect.

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?

The schema describes case_id as 'The numeric case id from search_cases', and the description reinforces that the ID comes from search_cases, adding contextual meaning beyond the schema definition.

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 clearly states the tool fetches one decided DOHA case in full and enumerates the contents (allegations, judge's findings, outcome, etc.), making it distinct from sibling tools like search_cases which returns a list.

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?

The description explicitly instructs to use case_id from search_cases, providing clear usage guidance and indicating when to use this tool (after retrieving a case ID from the search tool).

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

get_conduct_recency
Read-only
Inspect

How much time had passed between the most recent conduct and the decision, measured from dates stated in the decisions, for the incident-type concerns (drugs, alcohol, criminal conduct, sexual behavior, protected information, IT misuse). Reports median years before favorable vs unfavorable decisions, with counts. Descriptive association, never a prediction.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
guidelineNoOptional single concern letter to scope to: H drugs, G alcohol, J criminal, D sexual behavior, K protected information, M IT misuse
get_statistics
Read-only
Inspect

Grant/denial statistics over decided hearing-level DOHA cases, grouped by year or by guideline, always with sample sizes. Same population rules as the site's Insights page.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
byNoGrouping (default year)
year_toNo
guidelineNoOptional single guideline letter A-M to scope to
year_fromNo
get_timelinesA
Read-only
Inspect

Measured DOHA timelines: median days from Statement of Reasons to hearing and to decision, from dates stated in the decisions themselves. Optionally scoped to one decision year.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
yearNoOptional decision year to scope to
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true; description adds value by specifying the computed metrics (median days) and data source (dates from decisions). No contradictions or missing destructive behavior.

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?

Two sentences, 23 words, front-loaded with purpose and key constraint. Every word earns its place; no redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema, so description should clarify return format. It mentions 'median days' for two intervals but does not specify whether returned as a tuple, object, or single value. Could be more complete about output structure.

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 already describes the 'year' parameter (100% coverage). Description reinforces that it scopes to one decision year, adding slight specificity beyond schema. Baseline 3, credit for concise reinforcement.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description states it retrieves median days for DOHA timelines (Statement of Reasons to hearing and to decision). Clearly specific verb+resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_statistics.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention when not to use or provide context for selection among siblings.

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

search_cases
Read-only
Inspect

Search 30,000+ decided public DOHA security-clearance decisions (1996 to present). Full-text query plus filters. Returns matching cases with outcome, date, guidelines, and a citable URL each.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
levelNoDecision level
limitNoMax results, 1-25 (default 10)
queryNoFull-text search, e.g. "gambling debts sports betting"
outcomeNoFinal outcome filter
year_toNoLatest decision year
guidelineNoSingle guideline letter A-M (e.g. F = financial, B = foreign influence)
year_fromNoEarliest decision year, e.g. 2020
similar_cases
Read-only
Inspect

The most similar decided cases to a given case, ranked by how alike the ALLEGATIONS read (never by outcome). Same list shown on the case page.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax results, 1-10 (default 5)
case_idYesThe numeric case id

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Try in Browser

Your Connectors

Sign in to create a connector for this server.

Resources