中小企業庁が公開している公共調達情報を検索するためのサービスです。
公共調達情報を検索します。検索クエリ、件名、機関名、都道府県コード、カテゴリ（物品、工事、役務）などのパラメータを使用して詳細な検索が可能です。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| count | No | 返却する検索結果の最大件数（1〜1000、デフォルト: 10）。API にページングはないため、総ヒット件数（応答の SearchHits）がこれを超える場合は count を増やすか、cftIssueDate などの日付範囲で条件を分割して取得する | |
| query | No | 検索文字列 | |
| lgCode | No | 都道府県コード (JIS X0401): 北海道=01, 青森県=02, 岩手県=03, 宮城県=04, 秋田県=05, 山形県=06, 福島県=07, 茨城県=08, 栃木県=09, 群馬県=10, 埼玉県=11, 千葉県=12, 東京都=13, 神奈川県=14, 新潟県=15, 富山県=16, 石川県=17, 福井県=18, 山梨県=19, 長野県=20, 岐阜県=21, 静岡県=22, 愛知県=23, 三重県=24, 滋賀県=25, 京都府=26, 大阪府=27, 兵庫県=28, 奈良県=29, 和歌山県=30, 鳥取県=31, 島根県=32, 岡山県=33, 広島県=34, 山口県=35, 徳島県=36, 香川県=37, 愛媛県=38, 高知県=39, 福岡県=40, 佐賀県=41, 長崎県=42, 熊本県=43, 大分県=44, 宮崎県=45, 鹿児島県=46, 沖縄県=47 | |
| category | No | カテゴリー (1:物品, 2:工事, 3:役務) | |
| projectName | No | 件名 | |
| cftIssueDate | No | 公告日またはデータ取得日の範囲。日付は YYYY-MM-DD 形式で「開始日/終了日」のように指定する（例: "2026-07-01/2026-07-15"。開始日のみ: "2026-07-01/"、終了日のみ: "/2026-07-15"、単日: "2026-07-14/2026-07-14"） | |
| certification | No | 入札資格 (A, B, C, D) | |
| periodEndTime | No | 納入期限日の範囲。YYYY-MM-DD 形式で「開始日/終了日」のように指定する（例: "2026-07-01/2026-12-31"。片側のみも可） | |
| procedureType | No | 公示種別 (1:一般競争入札, 2:簡易公募型競争入札, 3:簡易公募型指名競争入札) | |
| organizationName | No | 機関名 | |
| openingTendersEvent | No | 開札日の範囲。YYYY-MM-DD 形式で「開始日/終了日」のように指定する（例: "2026-07-01/2026-08-31"。片側のみも可） | |
| maxDescriptionLength | No | 公告本文（ProjectDescription）の最大文字数（デフォルト: 1000）。超過分は切り詰められ ProjectDescriptionTruncated が true になる。全文が必要な場合は大きな値を指定するか、ExternalDocumentURI の原文書を参照する | |
| tenderSubmissionDeadline | No | 入札開始日の範囲。YYYY-MM-DD 形式で「開始日/終了日」のように指定する（例: "2026-07-01/2026-08-31"。片側のみも可: "2026-07-01/"） |
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| message | No | 0件時の案内 |
| SearchHits | No | 検索条件に該当した総ヒット件数（常に返る）。SearchResult の件数（最大 count 件）がこれより少ない場合、続きは cftIssueDate などの日付範囲で条件を分割して取得する（この API にページングはない） |
| SearchResult | No | 検索結果の一覧（最大 count 件） |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety semantics. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic search action—it does not mention pagination limitations, data truncation, rate limits, or other operational traits that the agent might need to know. Schema descriptions contain such details, but the tool description itself adds no value here.
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, focused sentence that front-loads the main action and summarizes key search dimensions. It contains no filler and every word adds value, making it appropriately sized for its purpose.
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's complexity (13 parameters) is fully addressed by a rich schema with 100% parameter descriptions and an output schema, the minimal tool description is sufficient to orient the agent. It does not need to repeat return-value details (covered by output schema) or enumerate all filters. A slightly more detailed overview could improve navigation, but the existing annotations and schema fill most gaps.
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?
The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description lists a few parameter names (query, projectName, organizationName, lgCode, category) but does not add semantics beyond what the schema already provides, such as value formats or constraints.
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's purpose: 公共調達情報を検索します (searches public procurement information). It uses a specific verb (検索) and resource (公共調達情報), and further lists filterable parameters, making the tool's function unambiguous even without sibling context.
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?
The description implies the tool is for searching public procurement information with detailed filters but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives (there are no sibling tools). The phrase '詳細な検索が可能です' gives a general sense of use, but no exclusions or situational recommendations are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user or an account that owns the GitHub organization, then choose Claim with GitHub.
HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at /.well-known/glama.json on the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.
DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Search U.S. federal, state, and local government procurement data and intelligence.
Taiwan government tender search and intelligence: 14M+ notices, vendor and agency reports.
Read-only MCP server for searching Japan government procurement bid information from the KKJ portal.
Search Brazilian government tenders and public procurement (PNCP): find notices and auctions by keyw
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of confusion between tools. The tool's purpose is clearly described, though it does not match the server name.
With a single tool, consistency is trivial. However, the name 'kkj-search' is ambiguous due to the undefined acronym 'kkj', and the verb-noun pattern is not fully transparent.
The server name indicates both search and analysis, but only one search tool is provided. This is too few tools for the claimed scope, leaving analysis completely unaddressed.
The tool only performs search, with no analysis or other operations. Moreover, the server name suggests real estate, while the tool handles public procurement, indicating a severe domain mismatch and incomplete surface.
