US Federal Awards (USAspending)

search_us_federal_awards

Find out who wins US federal contracts and grants, or what a company has been awarded. Searches USAspending.gov (official US Treasury data) across contracts, IDVs, grants or loans by keyword, recipient, awarding agency, NAICS and date range: award ID, recipient, UEI, amount, agency, dates, description, place of performance and links. Use for competitor research, partner finding or US public-sector sales leads. $0.02 per call, USDC on Base (x402).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "search_us_federal_awards"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`days`	No	Look-back days (default 365)
`limit`	No	Max results (default 20)
`naics`	No	NAICS codes
`query`	No	Keywords
`agency`	No	Awarding agency
`recipient`	No	Recipient name
`award_type`	No	Default contracts
`payment_signature`	No	x402 v2 PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header value. Omit to receive payment requirements.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the commercially critical trait: $0.02 per call settled in USDC on Base via x402, plus the fact that omitting payment_signature returns payment requirements. It does not cover rate limits, result pagination, or error behavior, so it is strong but not complete.

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 core purpose and dense throughout, with no filler sentences. The long colon-delimited middle clause is slightly overloaded with searchable and returned fields in one breath, but every element earns its place.

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?

For an 8-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies the data source, pricing mechanism and result fields an agent needs to judge suitability and cost. Pagination and failure modes are the remaining gaps, mitigated partly by the schema's limit/days parameters.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds value by enumerating both the searchable dimensions (keyword, recipient, awarding agency, NAICS, date range) and the returned fields (award ID, UEI, amount, place of performance, links). The return-field list is genuinely beyond the schema since no output schema exists.

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 verb and resource ('Find out who wins US federal contracts and grants') and names the authoritative data source (USAspending.gov, official US Treasury data). The scope is further bounded to contracts, IDVs, grants and loans, so an agent knows exactly what corpus is queried.

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 names the scenarios it serves ('competitor research, partner finding or US public-sector sales leads'), which tells an agent when to reach for it. There are no sibling tools, so no alternative routing is needed, but no exclusion or prerequisite conditions are stated either.

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

All US Federal Awards (USAspending) 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?