Skip to main content
Glama

workspace-alberta

by io.github.HarleyCoops

daily_bid_brief

Generate a free daily bid brief from CanadaBuys and Alberta APC for a business profile. Pass an inline profile to describe the business per call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoLook ahead this many days for matches and deadlines (default 14)
limitNoMaximum items per section (default 5, max 10)
profileNoInline business profile used for this call only. Overrides any saved profile. On the shared public endpoint without a subscriber key, this is the way to describe your business.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States it is free and daily but does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or whether it is a read-only operation. Lacks behavioral details.

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, front-loaded with purpose and sources. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Lacks description of return value (what does the brief look like?), prerequisites, and behavioral context. Without output schema, description should explain output format. Incomplete for a tool with nested parameters.

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% with descriptions for all parameters. Description adds context by explaining the inline profile and its usage on a public endpoint, which goes beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool generates a daily bid brief from CanadaBuys and Alberta APC using a business profile. Distinguishes from sibling tools like 'find_opportunities' which are more generic.

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?

Implies usage for generating a brief but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like 'find_matching_opportunities' or 'bid_no_bid_scorecard'. No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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

All workspace-alberta toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have overlapping purposes, e.g., multiple search/find tools (find_opportunities, find_matching_opportunities, search_opportunities, etc.) and detail retrieval tools (get_opportunity_details, get_alberta_opportunity_details, get_contract_details). This creates ambiguity for an agent to select the correct tool.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a verb_noun convention in snake_case (e.g., search_contracts, watch_opportunity). Some deviations like bid_no_bid_scorecard use a multi-word verb, but overall the pattern is consistent.

Tool Count3/5

25 tools is on the higher side for this domain. While the number could be justified by the need to handle both federal and provincial opportunities, many tools are redundant, making the surface feel heavy.

Completeness4/5

Core workflows (search, get details, watch/unwatch, set/profile, analyze) are covered. Minor gaps exist, like no batch operations or tool to clear watchlist, but the surface is largely complete for contract tracking.

Resources