L50 UK Data API

tenders supplier

tenders_supplier

Read-only

A company's UK public contract track record (Contracts Finder, England): contracts won and their value by year, median contract value, largest contract, top buyers, main categories and the 25 most recent awards. Costs $0.05 per call, paid in USDC on Base with x402.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "tenders_supplier"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Supplier name, e.g. Mitie
`years`	No	How many years back (default 3)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-schema context: the data source and geographic scope (Contracts Finder, England) and the paid-call model ($0.05 per call in USDC on Base via x402), which an agent needs before invoking. It does not cover behavior for unmatched supplier names or whether name matching is exact or fuzzy.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that first establishes what the resource is, then enumerates the returned fields, then closes with the cost and payment rail. Every clause carries information; nothing is repeated from the name or schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description does the work of listing what comes back, and it discloses source, geographic limit, and pricing. For a simple two-parameter read tool that is nearly sufficient; only the behavior for missing or ambiguous supplier names is left unspecified.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, with 'name' documented with an example ('Mitie') and 'years' documented with default and bounds, so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description only indirectly touches 'years' through 'by year' and adds no matching or formatting guidance beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the exact resource (a supplier's UK public contract track record from Contracts Finder, England) and enumerates the concrete outputs: contracts won and value by year, median value, largest contract, top buyers, categories, and 25 most recent awards. This clearly separates it from the generic 'tenders' and 'tenders_buyer' siblings by framing it around a company's historical awards rather than open opportunities, though it never states that contrast explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: the required 'name' parameter and the framing around a company's track record make it evident you call this to profile a supplier's past wins. There is no explicit when-to-use, no when-not-to-use, and no pointer to 'tenders' or 'tenders_buyer' as alternatives for different questions.

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

All L50 UK Data API 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?