Govparse Government Data Gateway

govcon_opportunity_search

What federal contract solicitations and grant opportunities can my business bid on right now? Unified search over SAM.gov contract opportunities and Grants.gov postings: keyword, awarding agency, NAICS prefix, set-aside (SBA, 8A, WOSB, SDVOSBC...), place-of-performance state, and posted/deadline date windows. One call answers 'find open federal money that fits us'. [price: $0.05/row]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`q`	No	Keyword in the opportunity title. Example: 'cybersecurity'.
`kind`	No	contract \| grant (CSV for both; default both).
`limit`	No	Max rows (default 25, cap 100).
`naics`	No	NAICS code prefix(es), CSV — contracts only. Example: '5415' covers all IT services.
`state`	No	Place-of-performance state code(s), CSV — contracts only.
`agency`	No	Awarding department/agency name fragment. Example: 'defense'.
`offset`	No	Rows to skip, for paging.
`setaside`	No	Set-aside code(s), CSV — contracts only: SBA, 8A, WOSB, SDVOSBC, HZC...
`posted_after`	No	Posted/open date on or after this date (YYYY-MM-DD).
`deadline_after`	No	Response/close deadline on or after this date (YYYY-MM-DD).
`deadline_before`	No	Response/close deadline on or before this date (YYYY-MM-DD).

Schema Changelog

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

First observedJul 24, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It mentions the source (SAM.gov, Grants.gov) and pricing, but does not disclose limitations, rate limits, or behavior on no results. It adequately describes what the tool does but lacks deeper behavioral context.

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?

The description is a single, information-dense sentence with a business-focused opening and all key filters enumerated. It includes pricing concisely. No wasted words, but the sentence is somewhat long, bordering on dense.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 11 parameters and no output schema, the description explains the tool's purpose and inputs well but does not describe the output format or structure. For a search tool, users might need to know what fields are returned. Lacks information on result details.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions and examples. The description lists filters in narrative form but adds minimal new information beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate; the description does not significantly compensate beyond what's already in the input schema.

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 starts with a clear business question and states it's a unified search over SAM.gov contract opportunities and Grants.gov postings. It lists all major filters, distinguishing it from sibling tools like govcon_award_search and govcon_opportunity_detail.

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 gives a clear use case: 'find open federal money that fits us'. It implies when to use this tool (when searching for open opportunities) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. However, the purpose is distinct enough from siblings.

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 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.

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

Need Help?