Sbir

Sbir Search Awards

sbir_search_awards

Read-onlyIdempotent

"Which companies won NASA SBIR Phase II awards for autonomy?" / "SBIR awards for [topic]" / "who received DoD SBIR funding" / "Phase I and Phase II awards at [agency]" — AWARDED federal Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and STTR grants: the small-business R&D contracts an agency has already funded. Search by keyword, agency ("DOD", "NASA", "DARPA", "NSF", "DOE", "HHS"), year, company, or state. Returns the winning company, award amount, agency and branch, topic code, abstract, fiscal year, and Phase (I/II/III). This is the tool for who WON federal small-business R&D money and how much; for opportunities still open to bid use sbir_search_solicitations.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`year`	No	Filter by award year (e.g., 2024)
`limit`	No	Number of results to return (default 20, max 100)
`state`	No	Filter by 2-letter US state code (e.g., "CA", "MA")
`agency`	No	Filter by funding agency: DOW (Department of War, formerly DOD — "DOD" is accepted and translated), HHS, NASA, NSF, DOE, USDA, EPA, DOC, ED, DOT, DHS.
`company`	No	Filter by company name
`keyword`	No	Search term to match against award titles, abstracts, and topics

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`count`	Yes	Number of awards returned
`awards`	Yes
`keyword`	Yes	Search keyword used

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed1 schema field changedAug 1, 2026
- changedInput schema / required
```
Previous value: -[
-  "keyword"
-]New value: +[]
```

Changed2 schema fields changedJul 31, 2026

changedInput schema / examples

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "agency": "DOD",
-    "keyword": "machine learning",
-    "limit": 20,
-    "year": 2024
-  },
-  {
-    "keyword": "renewable energy",
-    "limit": 50,
-    "state": "CA"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "agency": "DOW",
+    "keyword": "machine learning",
+    "limit": 20,
+    "year": 2024
+  },
+  {
+    "keyword": "renewable energy",
+    "limit": 50,
+    "state": "CA"
+  }
+]

changedInput schema / properties / agency / description

Previous value: -"Filter by funding agency (e.g., \"DOD\", \"HHS\", \"NASA\", \"NSF\", \"DOE\", \"USDA\")"New value: +"Filter by funding agency: DOW (Department of War, formerly DOD — \"DOD\" is accepted and translated), HHS, NASA, NSF, DOE, USDA, EPA, DOC, ED, DOT, DHS."

Changed1 schema field changedMay 13, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "awards": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "abstract": {
+            "description": "Award abstract or summary",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "agency": {
+            "description": "Funding agency code",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "award_amount": {
+            "description": "Award amount in dollars",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "award_id": {
+            "description": "Unique award identifier",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "award_title": {
+            "description": "Title of the award",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "award_year": {
+            "description": "Year award was made",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "branch": {
+            "description": "Agency branch or division",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "city": {
+            "description": "City location",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "company": {
+            "description": "Company name",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "phase": {
+            "description": "Funding phase (Phase I, Phase II, etc.)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "program": {
+            "description": "SBIR/STTR program type",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "state": {
+            "description": "2-letter state code",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "topic_code": {
+            "description": "Topic or program code",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "company",
+          "agency",
+          "award_title"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Number of awards returned",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "keyword": {
+      "description": "Search keyword used",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "keyword",
+    "count",
+    "awards"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedMay 6, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "agency": "DOD",
+    "keyword": "machine learning",
+    "limit": 20,
+    "year": 2024
+  },
+  {
+    "keyword": "renewable energy",
+    "limit": 50,
+    "state": "CA"
+  }
+]

First observedApr 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and openWorld behavior. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by clarifying these are awarded grants ('an agency has already funded') and explaining the DOD/DOW translation in the schema. It does not contradict any annotation.

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 efficiently structured: leading examples, then a clear definition of what it searches, then parameter summary, return fields, and an explicit sibling-tool distinction. Every sentence contributes value and nothing is wasted.

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 search tool with an output schema present, the description is complete: it covers use cases, available filters, return fields, and the distinction from the solicitations tool. Combined with the annotations and schema, the agent has all necessary context to select and invoke the tool.

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 input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description's prose lists the searchable fields (keyword, agency, year, company, state) but does not add meaningful semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Examples exist in the schema but not in the description itself.

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?

Description clearly states the tool searches awarded SBIR/STTR grants, using a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('federal small-business R&D money'). It distinguishes itself from the solicitation tool by explicitly saying this is for who WON funding versus open opportunities.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool and when not: 'This is the tool for who WON federal small-business R&D money and how much; for opportunities still open to bid use sbir_search_solicitations.' This clearly directs the agent to a sibling tool for the alternative use case.

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

All Sbir tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.