Skip to main content
Glama

Germany Tenders

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Germany Search Tenders

germany_search_tenders
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search official GERMAN government public-procurement tenders (Öffentliche Vergabe / Ausschreibungen) from the federal Bekanntmachungsservice open-data feed (oeffentlichevergabe.de), Open Contracting Data Standard (OCDS). Returns each notice shaped: ocid, title, buyer/Vergabestelle, contract value in EUR, procurement category, CPV code, procurement method, submission deadline, and publish date. Filter by publish-date range and/or a keyword (matched against title, description, buyer, and CPV description — German text). Defaults to the most recent days if no dates given. Data covers Germany only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax number of tenders to return (default 25, max 100). Results are newest-first.
queryNoOptional keyword to filter on (case-insensitive substring match against title, description, buyer name, and CPV description — German). Omit to return all notices in the date range. E.g. "Bauarbeiten", "Software", "Reinigung".
date_toNoLatest PUBLISH date to include, YYYY-MM-DD. Defaults to today.
date_fromNoEarliest PUBLISH date to include, YYYY-MM-DD. Defaults to ~30 days ago (only the most recent 3 days of that window are fetched per call — narrow the range for older notices).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / date_from / description
      Previous value: -"Earliest PUBLISH date to include, YYYY-MM-DD. Defaults to ~30 days ago (only the most recent 7 days of that window are fetched per call — narrow the range for older notices)."New value: +"Earliest PUBLISH date to include, YYYY-MM-DD. Defaults to ~30 days ago (only the most recent 3 days of that window are fetched per call — narrow the range for older notices)."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "date_from": "2024-11-01",
+    "date_to": "2024-11-15",
+    "limit": 25,
+    "query": "Bauarbeiten"
+  },
+  {
+    "date_to": "2024-11-15",
+    "limit": 50
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: the open-data feed source, the exact return shape, Germany-only scope, and the important caveat that 'only the most recent 3 days of that window are fetched per call'. This gives an agent realistic expectations about data recency and coverage. No contradiction exists.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is dense but efficient: the first sentence states purpose and source, the second gives return shape, and the third covers filters, defaults, and scope. The non-obvious 3-day fetch limitation is included without bloat. Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description compensates by listing the exact return fields and the kind of content returned. It also explains filtering, defaults, date-window limitation, and geographic coverage, which is everything needed to call the tool successfully even with zero required parameters. No critical operational detail is missing.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; all four parameters already have detailed descriptions in the schema. The description adds a summary of default date behavior and keyword matching, but it mostly restates what the schema already documents. It does not materially expand parameter semantics beyond what is structured.

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: 'Search official GERMAN government public-procurement tenders'. It then names the exact data source, the OCDS format, and the returned fields, making the tool's purpose unmistakable. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly limiting coverage to Germany.

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?

The description gives clear invocation context: filters by publish-date range and/or keyword, plus defaults when no dates are given. It does not name an alternative tool or explicitly say when not to use it, but no sibling tool appears to be a tender-search tool, so the omission is minor.

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

All Germany Tenders 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.

Resources