华哥·全国招投标数据
Server Details
查询 hndcw.com 全国政府招投标 / 建设项目库,可按关键词、省份、城市、行业、预算区间筛选,返回项目标题、地区、预算(万元)、业主单位、阶段、公告日期与原文链接。
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP · MCP 2024-11-05
- URL
- Repository
- mmcaoge/huage-mcp-servers
- GitHub Stars
- 0
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
Only one tool exists, so there is no risk of overlap or misselection between tools. Its purpose is clearly stated as querying a bidding-project database with filters.
The single tool uses a clear snake_case verb_noun pattern: search_bidding_projects. With only one tool there is no inconsistency to introduce ambiguity.
A single tool is thin for a national bidding-data server, even if it is well-scoped. Companion operations such as detail lookup, pagination, or export would make the set feel more complete.
The search tool covers keyword, region, industry, and budget filters and returns key project fields. However, there is no dedicated get-by-id, pagination, or supplementary metadata/statistics tool, leaving notable gaps for deeper workflows.
Available Tools
1 toolsearch_bidding_projectsAInspect
查询 hndcw.com 全国政府招投标/建设项目库。可按关键词、省份、城市、行业大类、预算区间筛选,返回项目标题、地区、预算(万元)、业主单位、阶段、公告日期与原文链接。适合"帮我找XX招标项目""查海口社会调查类标的"等问法。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| city | No | 城市名,如"海口""三亚" | |
| limit | No | 返回条数,默认 10,最大 50 | |
| keyword | No | 标题或摘要关键词,如"社会调查""信息化""海南" | |
| industry | No | 行业大类 A/B/C(工程/货物/服务),可不填 | |
| province | No | 省名,如"海南""广东""广西" | |
| maxBudget | No | 最大预算(万元) | |
| minBudget | No | 最小预算(万元) |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the data source and returned fields and implies a read-only query via 查询, but omits auth requirements, rate limits, pagination, and error behavior.
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 three compact clauses: purpose and filters first, return fields second, example queries third. Every sentence is informative and front-loaded with no filler.
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?
It compensates for the missing output schema by listing the returned fields, and the schema fully covers inputs. It omits operational details like pagination behavior, but remains complete enough for a search tool.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters in detail. The description reinforces the filterable dimensions—keyword, province, city, industry, and budget range—but adds no syntax, defaults, or constraints beyond the schema.
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 gives a specific verb and resource: 查询 hndcw.com 全国政府招投标/建设项目库. It also enumerates filter dimensions and return fields, making the tool's scope clear even without sibling tools.
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?
It provides concrete use cases such as 找招标项目 and 查海口社会调查类标的, which tells the agent when to invoke it. However, it does not state when not to use it or name alternatives, though no siblings exist.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
1 tool update
- First observed
search_bidding_projects
Related MCP Connectors
社会调查与现场执行服务咨询:满意度 / 民意 / 舆情 / 暗访 / 面访 / 座谈会等服务能力与报价查询,对接 hndcw.com 服务预约。
11Search government tenders and public procurement opportunities with structured results.
Matched public tenders, 12M past awards, buyer and supplier profiles, renewals, grants, web search
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceProvides comprehensive access to Chinese bidding and tendering data, enabling users to search for companies, analyze bidding statistics, query tender announcements, and discover project opportunities for market analysis and business development.11-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceSearch and analyze 14M+ Taiwan government tenders (since 1999, updated daily): full-text search, award records, vendor win-rate and rivalry reports, agency spending patterns with next-tender predictions, and bid price analysis. Free, no API key required.1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables searching and analyzing government tenders, contract awards, and pre-tender pipelines from 21 official sources, with tools for tender search, award intelligence, and detailed notice retrieval.MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables searching government tenders and public procurement opportunities with structured, anti-bot-handled results.-
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.