Winquill

Have Winquill draft the bid

start_bid_draft

Destructive

Use this when the user wants Winquill to write a whole bid for their team: it asks a few questions, drafts every answer from the company's evidence, then marks and revises them. Relay Winquill's questions as they are. A whole bid uses one of the month's full bids, so first call it without confirmed, tell the user how many are left and offer to write it here with draft_bid_response, which uses none; call again with confirmed only if they choose Winquill. notify says where to hear when it's ready. Needs a Winquill account and workspace. Example: {"tender_reference":"012345-2026"}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`notify`	No	Where Winquill says when the draft is ready, e.g. ["slack"]: the first of these apps where it has somewhere to say it, the conversation this call came from or else the workspace's first connected channel there. An empty list for nowhere.
`confirmed`	No	true once the user, told it uses one of this month's full bids, chose Winquill's drafting over writing it here answer by answer with draft_bid_response. Leave it out the first time.
`workspace`	No	The Winquill workspace to use, by name, when the user is in more than one, e.g. "Northbridge Services".
`questions_text`	No	The buyer's questions, or the invitation to tender's text, as the user shared it, including the text of files they attached. Left out, Winquill reads the documents the buyer published with the notice, or asks for them.
`tender_reference`	Yes	The notice ID, procurement identifier, solicitation number or the buyer's own reference, e.g. "012345-2026" on Find a Tender, "WS4851234567" on CanadaBuys or "140D0427Q0879" on SAM.gov.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	No
`tender`	No
`confirm`	No
`draftId`	No
`started`	No
`summary`	Yes
`bidsLeft`	No
`progress`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 27, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / confirmed / description

Previous value: -"true once the user, told it uses one of this month's full bids, chose Tenda's drafting over writing it here answer by answer with draft_bid_response. Leave it out the first time."New value: +"true once the user, told it uses one of this month's full bids, chose Winquill's drafting over writing it here answer by answer with draft_bid_response. Leave it out the first time."

changedInput schema / properties / notify / description

Previous value: -"Where Tenda says when the draft is ready, e.g. [\"slack\"]: the first of these apps where it has somewhere to say it, the conversation this call came from or else the workspace's first connected channel there. An empty list for nowhere."New value: +"Where Winquill says when the draft is ready, e.g. [\"slack\"]: the first of these apps where it has somewhere to say it, the conversation this call came from or else the workspace's first connected channel there. An empty list for nowhere."

changedInput schema / properties / questions_text / description

Previous value: -"The buyer's questions, or the invitation to tender's text, as the user shared it, including the text of files they attached. Left out, Tenda reads the documents the buyer published with the notice, or asks for them."New value: +"The buyer's questions, or the invitation to tender's text, as the user shared it, including the text of files they attached. Left out, Winquill reads the documents the buyer published with the notice, or asks for them."

changedInput schema / properties / workspace / description

Previous value: -"The Tenda workspace to use, by name, when the user is in more than one, e.g. \"Northbridge Services\"."New value: +"The Winquill workspace to use, by name, when the user is in more than one, e.g. \"Northbridge Services\"."

First observedOct 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (destructive/openWorld/non-idempotent), the description discloses the consumption of one monthly full bid, the account and workspace requirement, the two-step confirmation flow, the question-relay behavior, and how notification delivery is chosen. This is precisely the behavioral context annotations cannot convey.

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?

Front-loaded with the trigger, then quota, alternatives, and notification in a tight sequence. Every clause carries information an agent needs at call time; nothing is redundant with the schema.

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?

With an output schema and rich annotations already covering safety and return shape, the description fills the remaining gaps: prerequisites, quota cost, confirmation protocol, and question-relay obligation. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and safely.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning for 'confirmed' (must be omitted on the first call and supplied only after the quota trade-off is presented), explains how 'notify' signals readiness, and gives a concrete tender_reference example. The gain over the schema is modest but genuine.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Winquill to write a whole bid for their team') and outlines the full process (asks questions, drafts from evidence, marks and revises). It is clearly separable from siblings like draft_bid_response and continue_bid_draft, which it names or implies.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit trigger ('when the user wants Winquill to write a whole bid'), explicit alternative ('offer to write it here with draft_bid_response, which uses none'), and an explicit call sequence: invoke without 'confirmed' first, then again with it only if the user picks Winquill.

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

All Winquill tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?