Skip to main content
Glama

workspace-alberta

by io.github.HarleyCoops

find_matching_opportunities

Rank CanadaBuys and Alberta APC opportunities against a business profile. Pass an inline profile to describe the business per call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoOnly show opportunities closing within N days (default 60)
limitNoMaximum opportunities to return (default 15, max 30)
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

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden but only mentions that the profile overrides a saved one and targets the shared endpoint. It omits behavioral traits like read-only nature, rate limits, or whether ranking is deterministic.

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-load the core action and essential usage instruction, with no redundant or filler content.

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?

Given no output schema, the description does not explain the return format (e.g., ranked list structure or scores), nor does it mention constraints like max limit (30) although schema covers it. Adequate but could be more complete.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that the profile is inline and overrides saved profiles, but does not deepen semantics for days or limit beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'rank' and the resource 'opportunities' from specific sources (CanadaBuys and Alberta APC), and it distinguishes from siblings like 'find_opportunities' by requiring an inline profile.

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?

The description notes that an inline profile overrides any saved profile, implying usage for one-off matching, but it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool vs. alternatives like 'search_opportunities'.

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