Datailo: one MCP connection to tenders, EU regulation and law

Sign in (step 2 of 2)

datailo_connect_verify

Finish signing in. Call it RIGHT AFTER datailo_connect with the request_id and no code: it waits up to 45 s for the user to click Confirm in the email and returns as soon as they do (call again if it returns waiting — do not ask the user to report the click). If the user reads you the six-digit code, pass it as code. On success a durable dat_ key is issued (shown once) and, for clients without a connection session, a session value to pass on every later call; then carry on with what the user asked for.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`code`	No
`request_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / code / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

addedInput schema / properties / code / default
```
Added value: +null
```
removedInput schema / properties / code / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "request_id",
-  "code"
-]New value: +[
+  "request_id"
+]

First observedSep 23, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations are sparse (no safety hints), so the description carries the burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses that the tool waits up to 45 s, returns a waiting status, requires repeated calls, issues a durable dat_ key (shown once), and provides a session value when needed. No contradictions with annotations; this is exemplary behavioral disclosure.

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 a single dense paragraph with no filler. It front-loads the purpose, then gives step-by-step instructions and edge cases. Every sentence earns its place, using emphasis (RIGHT AFTER) for critical timing. It is efficient and well-structured.

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?

For a tool with no output schema and only two parameters, the description covers when to call, how to call, what to expect (waiting/success), retry logic, and post-success actions. It even addresses the client session edge case. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 0%, but the description explains both parameters: request_id is required (from step 1) and code is optional (if user reads it). It clarifies the semantics of 'no code' vs 'pass it as code'. This compensates fully for the missing schema descriptions.

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 states the exact purpose: 'Finish signing in' and identifies it as step 2 of 2, clearly distinguishing it from the sibling datailo_connect (step 1). It specifies the action (verify sign-in) and the resource (connection session). An agent can immediately understand what this tool does and how it differs from its siblings.

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 guidance: 'Call it RIGHT AFTER datailo_connect' with specific instructions on passing request_id and optionally code. It tells when to call again (if returns waiting) and what not to do ('do not ask the user to report the click'). It also explains post-success steps (carry on with user's request). This fully equips the agent to use the tool correctly.

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

All Datailo: one MCP connection to tenders, EU regulation and law 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?