Skip to main content
Glama

Govparse Government Data Gateway

by io.govparse

firmstanding_feed_enforcement

Which employers were hit with new federal enforcement actions since a given date? Bulk feed of OSHA inspections (violated standards, penalties, abatement dates), EPA ECHO formal enforcement actions (SNC/HPV flags, penalties), and DOL WHD concluded wage cases (back wages, statutes) — flat rows, cursor-paginated up to 1000/page, each resolved to the FirmStanding entity graph where a match exists, with tier and confidence disclosed. Public records; NOT a consumer report, no FCRA use. [price: $0.05/row]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoRows per page (default 500, cap 1000).
naicsNoNAICS code prefix(es), CSV. Example: '3116' covers animal processing.
sinceYesInclude events dated on or after this date (YYYY-MM-DD). Required.
stateNoFacility/employer state code(s), CSV.
agencyNoRestrict to source agencies (CSV): osha | epa | whd. Default all three.
cursorNoOpaque page cursor — pass the previous page's next_cursor unchanged.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It details the types of records included, cursor pagination (up to 1000/page), entity graph matching with tier/confidence, and pricing. This is quite transparent, though it omits rate limits and authentication requirements.

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 and information-dense, covering agencies, data fields, pagination, entity matching, and legal disclaimer in a single sentence. It is front-loaded with the key question and contains no wasted words.

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 the 6 parameters, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: pagination behavior, default and max limits, entity matching, and source agencies. It is complete enough for an agent to use effectively.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds high-level context (e.g., 'since a given date') but does not significantly enhance individual parameter understanding beyond what the schema provides.

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 clearly states the tool provides a bulk feed of federal enforcement actions from OSHA, EPA, and DOL WHD with specific fields. It distinguishes from siblings like `firmstanding_screen_enforcement` and `firmstanding_feed_distress` by mentioning 'bulk feed' and the specific agencies.

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?

The description starts with a question ('Which employers were hit with new federal enforcement actions since a given date?') that guides usage. It includes legal disclaimers (public records, not FCRA). While it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to siblings, the context is clear enough for an agent.

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

All Govparse Government Data Gateway 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

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct domain and specific action (e.g., FDA approvals vs clearances vs recalls; firmstanding business360 dossier vs search vs screen). Even overlapping concepts like 'business360' vs 'business360_lookup' are distinguished by input (UUID vs name+state). No two tools appear to do the same thing.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools use a consistent lowercase snake_case pattern with domain prefix (e.g., fda_*, firmstanding_*, fmcsa_*, govcon_*). Action words (search, lookup, screen, feed, stats) follow predictable usage. The naming is uniform and easy to parse.

Tool Count4/5

38 tools is on the higher end but appropriate for a comprehensive government data gateway spanning multiple agencies and datasets. Each domain has a reasonable number of tools (e.g., FMCSA: 7, OFLC: 6). Could potentially be trimmed slightly, but overall well-scoped for the stated purpose.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the major government data sources comprehensively: FDA (approvals, clearances, recalls), FMCSA (carrier census, safety, insurance, etc.), FSIS, DOJ/OFLC, OSHA/EPA/DOL enforcement, SEC insider filings, clinical trials, VA facilities/opportunities/vendors, and federal contracting. No obvious gaps for the stated gateway purpose.

Resources