Skip to main content
Glama

Find Arms Sales Notices by Buyer

arms_sales_buyer
Read-onlyIdempotent

Look up a buyer government in the Arms Sales Register by a substring of its name, of the purchaser as the notices print it, or of a country string as DOJ prints it in its FARA reports (for example "KOREA, SOUTH"). Returns up to 5 buyers, each with its notices and estimated value notified by year delivered, its rank by estimated value, the purchaser strings as printed, its 5 largest notices by estimated value with their items as printed, and any notice of its that is outside the totals; and, side by side and never added, the FARA money for each DOJ country string mapped to it with that string's own DOJ rank (a buyer mapped to several strings, such as the United Kingdom, shows each string's rank and no single rank of its own), the government and agency principal lines, and the firms registered under FARA for a principal there that also filed 2025 lobbying reports for a named contractor family, the two registrations shown side by side and never sequenced with any notice. FARA money is DOJ's figure for every principal under the country string DOJ prints (companies, parties and media as well as governments), for six-month periods ending in 2025, given with DOJ's footnote that a country or location is not reflective of U.S. foreign policy and does not imply a recognition of sovereignty; registration is a legal disclosure. Each row is a proposed sale notified to Congress, and its value is the estimated value the notice prints: never a price, a signed case, a contract or a payment. The estimated value notified, FARA money, connected-PAC money, lobbying amounts and the inaugural and super PAC records are separate records, shown side by side: never added together and never put in date sequence with a notice. Every answer carries the register's question note: these are proposed sales the Defense Department notified to Congress, as printed in the Federal Register; a notification is not a completed sale, and the records do not show why any sale was proposed or whether it went ahead. Every answer also carries the side-by-side caption, the as-of date, the date the Federal Register copies are printed through, each file's date, the source page on morvs.ai and the licence. Institutions only: no official, signer, lobbyist, treasurer, candidate or member of Congress is named, and single-person firms are withheld and appear only as counts. A name that matches only a withheld string answers exactly like a name that matches nothing. No party label is given and no buyer government is characterised.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesRequired case-insensitive buyer name, purchaser as printed or DOJ country string (for example "KOREA, SOUTH"); at most 80 characters.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the return shape and many operational constraints: up to 5 buyers, year-delivered estimated values, rank, five largest notices, outside-totals notices, side-by-side FARA records, withheld single-person firms, and the treatment of names matching only withheld strings. It also states important semantic limits, including that values are estimates, not prices or payments, and that records are never added or sequenced.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The purpose is front-loaded, but the description is extremely dense and repetitive, repeatedly restating that side-by-side records are never added or sequenced with notices. It contains useful caveats, but they are packed into long run-on sentences that make the definition harder to scan than necessary.

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?

With no output schema and a very complex return payload, the description supplies extensive detail about returned fields, value semantics, FARA side-by-side treatment, withholding rules, and legal caveats. An agent would have enough context to understand what the tool returns and how to interpret it.

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 already documents the single required name parameter at 100% coverage, including case-insensitivity and an example. The description adds meaningful matching semantics: substring matching across the buyer name, the purchaser as printed in notices, or a DOJ country string.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: it looks up a buyer government in the Arms Sales Register by substring of its name, purchaser string, or DOJ country string. It also enumerates the returned buyer-level records and distinguishes the buyer view from notice-level data by describing notices, values, ranks, purchaser strings, FARA money, and side-by-side fields.

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?

The context is clear: this is the buyer-oriented lookup tool for matching a name or country string against the register. However, it never names or explicitly contrasts sibling tools such as arms_sales_notices, arms_sales_contractor, or arms_sales_summary, so the agent must infer the boundaries.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.