Skip to main content
Glama

MORVS

by io.github.morvs-ai
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get a Federal Award by PIID

who_gets_your_data_government_award
Read-onlyIdempotent

One federal award in the "Bought by the government" lane of Who Gets Your Data, a MORVS pilot register built from USAspending prime contract transactions (award types A to D) by action-date fiscal year over the lane's window (FY2017 to FY2026 at launch), found by its PIID (6 to 40 letters, digits or hyphens, case ignored) through the register's lookup file. Returns each transaction with its date, fiscal year, amount obligated, label (a capability, a bundle, or a label that is never counted), basis, the matched words and the words as published or "withheld"; the award's review (label, verified words and note); its net obligations by fiscal year; and the outlay for the whole award where the award record gives it. It says whether the award is counted in the lane, awaiting review (never counted until reviewed), not counted (words mixed with another product), unclassified or in the separate benefits and identity panel. A PIID can name more than one award; each is returned. Amounts are obligations net of de-obligations, never outlays: an outlay appears only where the award record gives one, labelled as the outlay for the whole award. A contract is not proof of use on any person. Capability comes from the award's own words or a single-product vendor's product line, each with its basis (transaction_words, award_base_words, vendor_product or review); a bundle naming two capabilities sits in the lane total and in no capability total. The floor year (FY2026 at launch) is a floor, as Defense Department actions reach FPDS late, and each figure for it is flagged. A reviewed universe, not a complete inventory. An empty result returns the lane's absence note: no award in this reviewed universe, which says nothing about purchases outside it. The lane is a separate table: never added to the benefits and identity panel, the context (Palantir, Dataminr Defense Department licences), the excluded amounts or the handoff, broker and legal-duty tables. The answer carries as_of, the file dates, the source page on morvs.ai, the licence and the lane's universe, obligation, use, capability, floor, absence, context and panel notes. Recipients as filed, organisations only: the register drops sole proprietors and person-shaped recipients, and award words that could name a person are published as "withheld".

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
piidYesRequired award PIID, 6 to 40 letters, digits or hyphens (case ignored), for example 70CMSD25P00000111.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive behavior, but the description adds substantial context: counting statuses, review state, net obligations versus outlays, floor-year flagging, empty-result absence note, recipient exclusions, and withheld words. It discloses behavior well beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 description is a dense wall of clauses and caveats rather than a structured, front-loaded explanation. While much of the content is substantive, it is far longer than needed for a one-parameter lookup tool and would benefit from grouping into purpose, returns, and caveats.

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 complex data product, the description carries the full burden of explaining returned fields, statuses, caveats, and metadata such as `as_of`, file dates, source page, and licence. It is complete enough for an agent to understand what a successful or empty response means.

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?

The schema already covers the single `piid` parameter at 100%, including format, length, pattern, and an example. The description adds some PIID semantics, notably that one PIID can name more than one award, but most input details are already in the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 opening sentence states a specific resource and scope: one federal award in the "Bought by the government" lane, found by PIID through the register's lookup file. An agent can distinguish this from lane-level or summary tools because the lookup key and single-award return are explicit.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the required PIID and the lookup-file framing, but the description never explicitly says when to use this versus `who_gets_your_data_government`, `who_gets_your_data_lookup`, or `who_gets_your_data_summary`. It also gives no when-not-use guidance beyond noting that a PIID can return multiple awards.

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

All MORVS toolsInspect
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