Tender MCP

search_tenders

Searches active government tenders across UK, EU, and US. Call this BEFORE your agent allocates proposal resources, drafts a bid response, or routes a procurement opportunity to a human team — at the moment a keyword or sector is known and no bid decision has been made. Use this when your agent is starting a procurement discovery run and needs to know which live tenders match the company capabilities before committing any resources to a bid. Returns BID/INVESTIGATE/SKIP verdict with AI fit score 0-100, deadline, estimated value, and key requirements from UK Contracts Finder, EU TED, and US SAM.gov simultaneously. A missed tender deadline cannot be recovered. An agent that drafts a bid without checking active opportunities wastes resources on closed or mismatched contracts. Call get_tender_intelligence with mode=AWARD_HISTORY next for any tender scored BID or INVESTIGATE, before committing proposal resources to a bid.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max results per source (default 10, max 25)
`keyword`	Yes	Search keyword — company capability, product type, or service (e.g. "cybersecurity", "catering", "IT support")
`sources`	No	Which sources to search. Defaults to all three: ["uk","eu","us"]
`days_old`	No	Only return tenders published in the last N days (default 30)
`min_score`	No	Only return tenders scoring above this threshold (default 50). Only applies when company_profile is provided.
`company_profile`	No	Description of the company capabilities and what contracts they are looking for. Used for AI fit scoring. More detail = better scores. If omitted, results are returned unscored.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`errors`	No
`keyword`	Yes
`scoring`	No	Present only when company_profile was provided
`tenders`	Yes
`checked_at`	Yes
`_disclaimer`	Yes
`total_found`	Yes
`_intelligence`	No	Always-present upsell hook -- not gated by tier
`sources_searched`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedJun 24, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "_disclaimer": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "_intelligence": {
+      "description": "Always-present upsell hook -- not gated by tier",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "checked_at": {
+      "format": "date-time",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "errors": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "keyword": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "scoring": {
+      "description": "Present only when company_profile was provided",
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "sources_searched": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "tenders": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "ai_score": {
+            "description": "Present only when company_profile was provided",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "contracting_authority": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "description": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "fit_summary": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "reasons": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "recommendation": {
+            "enum": [
+              "BID",
+              "INVESTIGATE",
+              "SKIP",
+              null
+            ],
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "source": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "value": {
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "total_found": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "keyword",
+    "total_found",
+    "sources_searched",
+    "tenders",
+    "checked_at",
+    "_disclaimer"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed3 schema fields changedApr 21, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / company_profile

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Description of the company capabilities and what contracts they are looking for. Used for AI fit scoring. More detail = better scores. If omitted, results are returned unscored.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / keyword / description

Previous value: -"Search keyword — company capability, product type, or service (e.g. \"cybersecurity\", \"catering\", \"IT support\", \"construction\")"New value: +"Search keyword — company capability, product type, or service (e.g. \"cybersecurity\", \"catering\", \"IT support\")"

addedInput schema / properties / min_score

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only return tenders scoring above this threshold (default 50). Only applies when company_profile is provided.",
+  "type": "number"
+}

First observedApr 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return type (BID/INVESTIGATE/SKIP verdict, score, deadline, etc.), warns about non-recoverable deadlines, and explains the consequence of skipping this step. However, it omits that the AI fit score only applies when company_profile is provided—a meaningful behavioral nuance. The warning and workflow guidance earn a 4, but the scoring dependency keeps it from a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is longer than typical but well-structured: purpose → usage guidance → output summary → urgency context → next step. Each sentence adds operational value, though it is slightly wordy. It earns a 4 for being front-loaded and purposeful, not a 5 because some redundancy exists (e.g., 'before committing resources' appears twice).

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?

Given the tool's complexity (6 params, multi-source search, scoring logic, output schema present), the description covers the essential workflow: what it does, when to use, key outputs, and next step. The main gap is the unstated condition that scoring only occurs with company_profile, but the schema covers that. Overall, it is reasonably complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add much parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it mentions 'company capabilities' in a workflow context but does not explain individual parameters. The schema's own descriptions are thorough, so the description earns a baseline 3 without adding extra value.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Searches active government tenders across UK, EU, and US.' It clearly differentiates from the sibling tool by explaining that this is the discovery step ('starting a procurement discovery run') and that get_tender_intelligence is the follow-up. This is a textbook example of purpose clarity.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this BEFORE your agent allocates proposal resources... at the moment a keyword or sector is known and no bid decision has been made.' It also names an explicit alternative/next step: 'Call get_tender_intelligence with mode=AWARD_HISTORY next for any tender scored BID or INVESTIGATE.' This exceeds the bar for usage guidance.

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

All Tender MCP 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.