Skip to main content
Glama

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

by com.datailo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List workflows

datailo_workflows
Read-onlyIdempotent

Cross-service jobs first (service 'datailo', kind 'job': whole work products that chain several services), then each service's ready-made playbooks, marked enabled or not. Open one with datailo_workflow.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNo
serviceNo
sessionNoThe `session` value datailo_connect_verify returned. Pass it on every Datailo call in this conversation; omit it when the user connected with Sign in (OAuth) or a key.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / session / description
      Previous value: -"The `session` value datailo_connect_verify returned, when this client keeps no connection session. Pass it on every Datailo call in this conversation; omit it when the user connected with Sign in (OAuth) or a key."New value: +"The `session` value datailo_connect_verify returned. Pass it on every Datailo call in this conversation; omit it when the user connected with Sign in (OAuth) or a key."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / session
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "The `session` value datailo_connect_verify returned, when this client keeps no connection session. Pass it on every Datailo call in this conversation; omit it when the user connected with Sign in (OAuth) or a key.",
+  "title": "Session"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive nature, so the description adds value by specifying the ordering (cross-service jobs first) and the enabled/disabled marking. This goes beyond the annotation safety profile, giving the agent insight into the output structure without contradicting the annotations.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. The key ordering and content details are front-loaded, and the pointer to datailo_workflow is efficient. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a listing tool with optional parameters, the description covers the output content and ordering, but it fails to clarify the purpose of 'q' and 'service' parameters. Given no output schema, an agent might not know how filtering works. It's adequate but has clear gaps, making it a minimum viable description rather than fully complete.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 33% (only 'session' is explained). The description does not clarify the 'q' or 'service' parameters at all. It mentions 'service datailo' but that's about a specific service name, not the filter parameter. With low coverage, the description should compensate but doesn't, leaving two parameters under-specified.

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 lists workflows, and distinguishes its content (cross-service jobs first, then playbooks) from the sibling datailo_workflow (which opens a single one). The verb 'list' plus resource 'workflows' is specific and unambiguous.

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 usage context: it lists workflows and points the agent to open one with datailo_workflow. It does not explicitly say when not to use it, but the pointer to the sibling provides practical guidance. It lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives like datailo_tools or datailo_catalog, so it's not a full usage guide.

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 toolsInspect
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