Skip to main content
Glama

Datagouv Fr

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Subscribe to Alerts

subscribe
Idempotent

Create a proactive monitoring subscription to a live-data event stream. Returns the new subscription id. Requires a Pipeworx OAuth account (anonymous + BYO cannot persist subscriptions). Supported types: "sec_8k" (8-K filings matching ticker + item codes — e.g. items:["5.02"] = officer change), "polymarket_edge" (Polymarket↔Kalshi cross-venue mispricings — params:{topic:"fed"}), "fred_series" (new FRED observations — params:{series_id:"UNRATE"}). Delivery channels: feed (always on — pull via recent_alerts or GET registry.pipeworx.io/alerts.json), and optionally email (set delivery:{email:"you@x.com"}) or sms (delivery:{sms:"+15551234567"} — phone must be verified at /account first; 10/day cap).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesSubscription type.
paramsYesType-specific filter. sec_8k: {ticker:"AAPL", items?:["5.02","1.01"]}. polymarket_edge: {topic:"fed", min_spread_bps?:500}. fred_series: {series_id:"UNRATE"}. patent_grant: {applicant:"Apple Inc."}. clinical_trial: {sponsor?:"Pfizer", condition?:"lung cancer", phase?:"PHASE3"} (sponsor or condition required).
deliveryNoOptional delivery channels in addition to the always-on persistent feed. {email:"you@x.com"} sends a templated alert per fired event. {sms:"+15551234567"} sends an SMS per event — must match the verified phone on the caller's account (verify at https://pipeworx.io/account first; 10/day cap). {webhook:"https://..."} POSTs each event JSON to your endpoint, HMAC-signed — the response includes delivery.webhook_secret (whsec_…) ONCE; verify X-Pipeworx-Signature = sha256 HMAC of "<X-Pipeworx-Timestamp>.<raw body>". Auto-disabled after 10 consecutive failing runs.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only and non-destructive; the description adds valuable behavioral details: account prerequisites, SMS verification and cap, always-on feed with retrieval instructions. It does not contradict annotations and provides context beyond the structured hints.

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 a single, dense paragraph with the purpose front-loaded. Some redundancy exists with the schema (e.g., delivery examples), but the extra explanations (like item code meanings) earn their place; no wasted filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should fully describe the return value; it only says 'Returns the new subscription id' without mentioning webhook secret or full response shape. It also omits guidance on managing subscriptions (listing/cancelling), though those are covered by sibling tools. Given the tool's moderate complexity, the description is serviceable but has notable gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds meaningful semantics not fully in the schema, such as explaining that items:["5.02"] for sec_8k means officer change, and it gives concrete examples for delivery channels.

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 action ('Create') and the resource ('proactive monitoring subscription to a live-data event stream'), differentiating it from siblings like list_subscriptions and unsubscribe by focusing on creation. It even enumerates supported subscription types, making the tool's scope unmistakable.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Provides clear context and exclusions: requires a Pipeworx OAuth account (anonymous/BYO cannot persist), SMS requires verified phone with a 10/day cap. However, it does not explicitly refer to alternative tools (e.g., list_subscriptions, unsubscribe) for when to use them instead, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All Datagouv Fr 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

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools are near-duplicates: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded share nearly identical behavior, and validate_claim overlaps heavily with ask_pipeworx_grounded. ai_visibility_check vs scan_competitor_ai_presence also overlap. dataset/organization vs search_datasets/search_organizations could confuse agents.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming is inconsistent: snake_case (ask_pipeworx, deep_research, entity_profile), long descriptive names (scan_competitor_ai_presence, polymarket_edge_tracker), and terse single words (dataset, organization). No coherent naming convention across the set.

Tool Count2/5

37 tools is heavy, and most are Pipeworx platform tools (Polymarket analysis, npm dependency scanning, llms.txt generation, memory ops) that are far out of scope for a 'Datagouv Fr' French open-data server. Only ~6 tools (search_datasets, search_organizations, reuses_search, resources, dataset, organization) relate to the server's stated domain.

Completeness3/5

The data.gouv.fr browsing surface is reasonably complete: search datasets, search organizations, list reuses, fetch resources, get dataset/organization by slug. However the server lacks common catalogue operations like downloading a resource from a URL, inspecting dataset metadata details, or community/follow features — plus the bulk of tools target entirely different domains, leaving the actual data.gouv.fr scope thin.

Resources