Skip to main content
Glama

procurement_strategy

Determine whether to lock annual contract rates, use spot market, or split for ocean freight lanes by comparing costs, break-even rates, and risk-adjusted outcomes across market regimes.

Instructions

Decide the OCEAN SOURCING STRATEGY for a lane over a YEAR — lock an annual/quarterly CONTRACT rate, stay on SPOT, or SPLIT — and in what proportion. This is the procurement/CFO decision the other tools don't touch: not 'book this box now' but 'how do I source my whole volume?'. It costs THREE strategies over your expected annual volume: 100% SPOT, 100% CONTRACT, and the OPTIMAL MIX. The spot side is a real DISTRIBUTION, not a mean: it builds a 52-week expected-spot path from our own forecast (Holt-Winters), the corridor's spot volatility and the seasonal calendar, so a peak-season spike shows up as a fat P95 TAIL. It reads the MARKET REGIME (soft / balanced / tight / extreme) — because the contract↔spot relationship FLIPS with the cycle: in a soft market a contract sits ABOVE cheap spot (you'd overpay), in a tight market spot spikes above contract (the contract PROTECTS you). It computes the BREAK-EVEN contract rate (where 100% contract beats expected 100% spot), optimizes the contract/spot MIX on a mean-variance objective for your risk tolerance (contract the steady base, leave the peak on spot), models MQC shortfall penalties (the cost of over-committing in a light year) and the loading-PRIORITY a contract buys (less peak rollover), and quantifies the VALUE OF PROTECTION in dollars. Honest by design (regla 7): the contract↔spot relationship is regime-dependent and uncertain, so contract rates are MODELED BANDS anchored to the lane's mid-cycle — NOT a filed carrier tariff. Pass your own offered contract rate to score it against break-even. PREMIUM: pay per call with x402 (USDC on Base) or set a prepaid key (FREIGHT_PULSE_KEY). Same UN/LOCODE port normalization as get_spot_rate.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
origin_portYesOrigin port (city name, UN/LOCODE, or 'City, Country'). Same resolution as get_spot_rate.
dest_portYesDestination port (city name, UN/LOCODE, or 'City, Country').
container_typeNoContainer size '20ft'/'40ft'/'40HC'. Optional; defaults to '40ft'.
annual_volumeYesExpected ANNUAL volume in containers of this type (TEU-equivalent ok) — REQUIRED. It is the basis of the contract-vs-spot trade-off.
risk_toleranceNo'low' (pay to avoid the tail → favors contract), 'medium' (default), or 'high' (chase the mean → favors spot). Sets the mean-variance λ.
contract_rate_offeredNoAn actual contract rate you've been offered (USD/container). If given, it is scored against break-even instead of using the modeled band. Optional.
volume_cvNoRelative std-dev of YOUR annual volume (e.g. 0.2 = ±20%), driving MQC shortfall risk. Optional; default 0.20.
ship_dateNoShip-date / contract-start anchor (ISO 'YYYY-MM-DD') for the seasonal & forecast overlay. Optional; defaults to today.
weeksNoWeeks of lane history to analyze for the forecast & mid-cycle reference (4–52, default 16). Optional.
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it models three strategies, builds a spot distribution, reads market regime, computes break-even, optimizes mix, models MQC penalties, and quantifies value of protection. It also mentions pricing and UN/LOCODE normalization. No contradictions with annotations.

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 long but efficient given the tool's complexity. It front-loads the core purpose in the first sentence, then provides necessary behavioral details. While dense, every sentence adds unique information; however, it could be slightly more structured with paragraphs for readability.

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?

The description thoroughly explains the internal logic but lacks information about the return value or output format (no output schema provided). It does not specify whether the output is a recommendation, a comparison table, or a percentage split. This gap reduces completeness for execution.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant meaning beyond the schema: it explains the role of annual_volume as the basis of trade-off, risk_tolerance setting the mean-variance λ, volume_cv driving shortfall risk, and contract_rate_offered being scored against break-even. This enriches the agent's understanding.

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 decides 'OCEAN SOURCING STRATEGY' for a lane over a year—locking contract, staying on spot, or splitting. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying this is the 'procurement/CFO decision' and not a tactical booking tool like 'book this box now'. The verb 'decide' and resource 'sourcing strategy' are specific.

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 clear context: 'This is the procurement/CFO decision the other tools don't touch'. It implies usage when strategic sourcing over a year is needed, contrasting with tactical tools. However, it does not explicitly list alternative tools or conditions for when not to use it, leaving some ambiguity.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Baneado98/freight-pulse'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server