Govparse Government Data Gateway

govcon_subaward_search

When a prime wins federal work, who does it flow subcontracts and subgrants down to? Search USAspending subawards (File F prime → sub cascade) by sub-recipient or prime name/UEI, prime award id, awarding agency, NAICS, PSC, subaward type (contract/grant), place-of-performance state, amount, or action date. Set new_subawardee=true for first-time subawardees — subs with NO prime award on record, coming up through subcontracts (a bonding/staffing/lending/teaming lead). Public federal records. [price: $0.05/row]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`psc`	No	Product/Service Code(s), CSV — exact.
`sort`	No	field:direction — amount \| action_date. Default 'action_date:desc'.
`type`	No	contract \| grant (sub-contract vs sub-grant). CSV for both.
`limit`	No	Max rows (default 25, cap 100).
`naics`	No	NAICS code prefix(es), CSV. Example: '5415' covers all IT services.
`state`	No	Place-of-performance state code(s), CSV.
`agency`	No	Awarding agency or sub-agency name fragment. Example: 'navy'.
`offset`	No	Rows to skip, for paging.
`sub_uei`	No	Sub-recipient Unique Entity Identifier (SAM UEI), exact match.
`new_since`	No	Sub-recipient's FIRST observed subaward on or after this date (YYYY-MM-DD).
`prime_uei`	No	Prime recipient Unique Entity Identifier (SAM UEI), exact match.
`amount_max`	No	Maximum subaward amount in USD.
`amount_min`	No	Minimum subaward amount in USD.
`awarded_after`	No	Subaward action date on or after (YYYY-MM-DD).
`sub_recipient`	No	Sub-recipient (subcontractor/subgrantee) name fragment.
`awarded_before`	No	Subaward action date on or before (YYYY-MM-DD).
`new_subawardee`	No	true → only first-time subawardees: subs with NO prime award on record.
`prime_award_id`	No	Prime award PIID / FAIN, exact match — all subs under one prime.
`prime_recipient`	No	Prime recipient name fragment. Example: 'lockheed'.

Schema Changelog

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

AddedJul 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears the transparency burden. It mentions public records and pricing but does not disclose result format, pagination behavior beyond limits, or error scenarios.

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 detailed but not overly verbose; it front-loads the purpose and organizes parameters logically. Minor redundancy in examples could be trimmed.

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?

Given 19 parameters and no output schema, the description covers all inputs with examples and clarifications. It lacks return value details but is otherwise thorough for a search tool.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context: explains CSV usage, prime vs sub terminology, and new_subawardee semantics, enhancing parameter understanding beyond the 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 clearly states the tool searches USAspending subawards, specifying the data source (File F prime → sub cascade) and distinguishing it from sibling tools like govcon_award_search by focusing on subawards.

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 provides extensive parameter guidance with examples and explains specific use cases (e.g., new_subawardee for first-time subawardees). However, it lacks explicit 'when not to use' or direct comparisons to 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?