Search CanadaBuys and Alberta Purchasing Connection together.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum combined results (default 20, max 50) | |
| source | No | all, federal, or alberta | all |
| category | No | Optional category such as services, goods, construction, steel, lumber | |
| keywords | No | Search words or phrase | |
| province | No | Optional province or delivery region filter |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, result format, ordering, or side effects. It only states that it searches two sources together.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it could be more structured by front-loading key information like the combined search behavior.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain return values, how results are combined from two sources, or any filtering behavior beyond parameters.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
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 no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions; it only reiterates the tool's scope.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool searches CanadaBuys and Alberta Purchasing Connection together. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like search_alberta_opportunities or find_opportunities, which may have different scopes.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for searching only one source). The description lacks context on prerequisites or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
