Skip to main content
Glama

Usaspending

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Usa Award Search

usa_award_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search US federal PROCUREMENT CONTRACTS / government contract awards for goods and services. Use recipient_name for "contracts won by Lockheed Martin"; keywords searches award descriptions/topics, not contractor identity. Dates are optional and default to the last 12 months for "recent" questions. Returns recipient, award amount, dates, and contract type.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of results (1-100, default 10)
naicsNoNAICS code to filter by (e.g., "541512")
stateNoPlace-of-performance US state, 2-letter code (e.g., "MD", "TX"). Filters to contracts performed in that state.
agencyNoAwarding agency name (e.g., "Department of Defense")
end_dateNoEnd date in YYYY-MM-DD format
keywordsNoSearch keywords (e.g., ["cybersecurity", "cloud"] or ["goods", "services"])
set_asideNoSmall-business set-aside filter. Accepts a family name ("HUBZone", "8(a)", "WOSB", "EDWOSB", "SDVOSB", "Veteran", "Small business", "Indian"), a FAR code ("HZC", "8AN", "SDVOSBC"), or the literal USAspending description ("HUBZONE SET-ASIDE"). Matches both the set-aside and sole-source variants of a family.
start_dateNoStart date in YYYY-MM-DD format
recipient_nameNoContractor/recipient name (e.g., "Lockheed Martin"). Use for awards won by a company; do not put company names in keywords.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitYesNumber of results returned
awardsYesList of matching contract awards
total_resultsYesTotal number of matching awards

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / set_aside / description
      Previous value: -"Set-aside type filter"New value: +"Small-business set-aside filter. Accepts a family name (\"HUBZone\", \"8(a)\", \"WOSB\", \"EDWOSB\", \"SDVOSB\", \"Veteran\", \"Small business\", \"Indian\"), a FAR code (\"HZC\", \"8AN\", \"SDVOSBC\"), or the literal USAspending description (\"HUBZONE SET-ASIDE\"). Matches both the set-aside and sole-source variants of a family."
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / examples
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "end_date": "2024-12-31",
-    "keywords": [
-      "cybersecurity"
-    ],
-    "start_date": "2024-01-01"
-  },
-  {
-    "agency": "Department of Defense",
-    "end_date": "2024-12-31",
-    "keywords": [
-      "cloud",
-      "infrastructure"
-    ],
-    "limit": 25,
-    "naics": "541512",
-    "start_date": "2023-01-01"
-  },
-  {
-    "agency": "Department of Defense",
-    "end_date": "2024-12-31",
-    "limit": 10,
-    "start_date": "2024-10-01"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "limit": 10,
+    "recipient_name": "Lockheed Martin"
+  },
+  {
+    "end_date": "2024-12-31",
+    "keywords": [
+      "cybersecurity"
+    ],
+    "start_date": "2024-01-01"
+  },
+  {
+    "agency": "Department of Defense",
+    "end_date": "2024-12-31",
+    "keywords": [
+      "cloud",
+      "infrastructure"
+    ],
+    "limit": 25,
+    "naics": "541512",
+    "start_date": "2023-01-01"
+  },
+  {
+    "agency": "Department of Defense",
+    "end_date": "2024-12-31",
+    "limit": 10,
+    "start_date": "2024-10-01"
+  }
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / recipient_name
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Contractor/recipient name (e.g., \"Lockheed Martin\"). Use for awards won by a company; do not put company names in keywords.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "start_date",
-  "end_date"
-]New value: +[]
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / examples
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "end_date": "2024-12-31",
-    "keywords": [
-      "cybersecurity"
-    ],
-    "start_date": "2024-01-01"
-  },
-  {
-    "agency": "Department of Defense",
-    "end_date": "2024-12-31",
-    "keywords": [
-      "cloud",
-      "infrastructure"
-    ],
-    "limit": 25,
-    "naics": "541512",
-    "start_date": "2023-01-01"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "end_date": "2024-12-31",
+    "keywords": [
+      "cybersecurity"
+    ],
+    "start_date": "2024-01-01"
+  },
+  {
+    "agency": "Department of Defense",
+    "end_date": "2024-12-31",
+    "keywords": [
+      "cloud",
+      "infrastructure"
+    ],
+    "limit": 25,
+    "naics": "541512",
+    "start_date": "2023-01-01"
+  },
+  {
+    "agency": "Department of Defense",
+    "end_date": "2024-12-31",
+    "limit": 10,
+    "start_date": "2024-10-01"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "keywords",
-  "start_date",
-  "end_date"
-]New value: +[
+  "start_date",
+  "end_date"
+]
  4. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / keywords / description
      Previous value: -"Search keywords (e.g., [\"cybersecurity\", \"cloud\"])"New value: +"Search keywords (e.g., [\"cybersecurity\", \"cloud\"] or [\"goods\", \"services\"])"
    • addedInput schema / properties / state
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Place-of-performance US state, 2-letter code (e.g., \"MD\", \"TX\"). Filters to contracts performed in that state.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  5. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "awards": {
+      "description": "List of matching contract awards",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "award_amount": {
+            "description": "Total award amount in dollars",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "award_id": {
+            "description": "Unique award identifier",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "awarding_agency": {
+            "description": "Name of the awarding agency",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "awarding_sub_agency": {
+            "description": "Sub-agency that awarded the contract",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "contract_type": {
+            "description": "Type of contract award",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "description": {
+            "description": "Award description",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "end_date": {
+            "description": "Award end date",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "naics_code": {
+            "description": "NAICS industry code",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "recipient_name": {
+            "description": "Name of the contractor/recipient",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "start_date": {
+            "description": "Award start date",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "total_outlays": {
+            "description": "Total amount paid out",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "award_id",
+          "recipient_name",
+          "award_amount",
+          "total_outlays",
+          "start_date",
+          "end_date",
+          "awarding_agency",
+          "awarding_sub_agency",
+          "description",
+          "naics_code",
+          "contract_type"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "limit": {
+      "description": "Number of results returned",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "total_results": {
+      "description": "Total number of matching awards",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "total_results",
+    "limit",
+    "awards"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  6. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "end_date": "2024-12-31",
+    "keywords": [
+      "cybersecurity"
+    ],
+    "start_date": "2024-01-01"
+  },
+  {
+    "agency": "Department of Defense",
+    "end_date": "2024-12-31",
+    "keywords": [
+      "cloud",
+      "infrastructure"
+    ],
+    "limit": 25,
+    "naics": "541512",
+    "start_date": "2023-01-01"
+  }
+]
  7. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds behavioral context by explaining default date handling and clarifying that keywords search descriptions/topics, not contractor identity, which complements the annotations without contradiction.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the core purpose and then add essential usage details. It avoids redundancy and includes only high-value clarifications, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

Since the tool has an output schema, the description does not need to explain return formats. It covers key usage constraints, parameter roles, and default behaviors, making it sufficiently complete for an agent to decide when and how to invoke it. Minor omissions like pagination or error handling are acceptable given the output schema.

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% for all 9 parameters, providing a solid baseline. The description augments semantics for recipient_name (explicitly steering away from keywords) and keywords (clarifying they search descriptions/topics), going beyond the schema definitions. No parameter is left ambiguous.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description specifies a clear verb ('Search'), a well-defined resource ('US federal PROCUREMENT CONTRACTS / government contract awards'), and scope ('goods and services'). It is specific enough to distinguish from generic search tools, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools like usa_spending_by_agency or usa_recipient_profile to differentiate them.

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?

The description provides useful usage hints, such as using recipient_name for company-specific queries and keywords for descriptions/topics, plus a default date range for 'recent' questions. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over sibling tools (e.g., comparing with usa_spending_trends), leaving some ambiguity about tool selection.

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

All Usaspending toolsInspect
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.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded are essentially the same router with different output modes, and ask_pipeworx_beta is currently identical to ask_pipeworx. There is also meaningful overlap between entity_profile, compare_entities, recent_changes, validate_claim, and the USAspending profile/search tools.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are lower_snake_case with useful prefixes like ask_, polymarket_, and usa_, which helps grouping. However, the underlying convention is mixed: some are verb+object, some are noun phrases, and some are bare verbs, so there is no uniform verb_noun pattern.

Tool Count2/5

38 tools is well beyond the heavy range, and most of them are unrelated to USAspending: Polymarket betting, npm dependency checks, AI visibility, memory storage, and meta-tools. The actual USAspending-specific surface is only about seven tools, making the server feel bloated and unfocused.

Completeness3/5

The federal-contract cluster covers award search, recipient/incumbent profiles, expiring awards, and spending by agency/category/trend, which handles the main contracting questions. Missing award-detail retrieval, grants/assistance coverage, and open-solicitation lookup, which usa_expiring_awards explicitly punts to external samgov/govcon tools.

Resources