Skip to main content
Glama

Us Gov Contracts

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Gov Contracts Search

gov_contracts_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search AWARDED US state & local government contracts, normalized across jurisdictions (keyless open data). Filter by vendor (winning supplier), keyword (contract title/description), awarding agency, and minimum dollar amount. Covers state and county contract registries — pass a jurisdiction key (see gov_contracts_jurisdictions) to target one, or omit it to search all covered jurisdictions at once. Returns each contract with its ID, vendor, title, agency, amount, and dates. This is STATE/LOCAL award data (for federal contracts use USAspending/SAM tools).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax contracts per jurisdiction (default 20, max 100).
agencyNoAwarding agency/department to match (case-insensitive substring). Not all jurisdictions carry an agency field.
vendorNoWinning vendor/supplier name to match (case-insensitive substring), e.g. "Microsoft".
keywordNoMatch against contract title/description (case-insensitive substring), e.g. "software", "road".
min_amountNoOnly contracts whose value is at least this many dollars.
jurisdictionNoJurisdiction key to target (e.g. "tx", "wa", "king-county-wa"). Omit to search all covered jurisdictions. Use gov_contracts_jurisdictions to list keys.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "jurisdiction": "tx",
+    "keyword": "software",
+    "limit": 20,
+    "min_amount": 50000,
+    "vendor": "Microsoft"
+  },
+  {
+    "agency": "transportation",
+    "keyword": "road construction",
+    "limit": 50
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The annotation set (readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, non-destructive) already establishes safety; the description adds context: 'keyless open data' (no auth), 'normalized across jurisdictions', coverage of state/county registries, and the return fields. This is rich behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Four sentences deliver all essential information: purpose, filters, jurisdiction handling, return fields, and federal-tool exclusion. No filler or redundancy; front-loaded with the primary action.

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?

Given 6 optional params, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers the return structure, filtering semantics, scope, and alternative tools. The only non-schema detail is the jurisdiction key pointer, which is present. It's complete for an agent to use this tool correctly.

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% with detailed property descriptions. The description restates the filterable fields but adds value by linking the `jurisdiction` parameter to gov_contracts_jurisdictions, telling the agent where to obtain valid keys. That cross-reference earns above-baseline credit.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair ('Search AWARDED US state & local government contracts'), and later specifies 'This is STATE/LOCAL award data' to distinguish from federal contract tools. It also enumerates filter types, making the purpose unmistakable.

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?

It explicitly states when not to use it ('for federal contracts use USAspending/SAM tools') and describes how to scope by jurisdiction (omit for all, pass key for specific), referencing gov_contracts_jurisdictions for key lookup. This is clear when-to-use guidance.

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

All Us Gov Contracts 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