Gsa Auctions

Ask Pipeworx Beta

ask_pipeworx_beta

Read-onlyIdempotent

Beta version of ask_pipeworx: identical universal router (same 7,397 tools, same arguments, same response shape) with candidate routing improvements enabled live whenever one is under test. No candidate is active right now (the last was retired on outcome evidence 2026-07-26), so this currently matches ask_pipeworx exactly. Use it exactly like ask_pipeworx when you want the newest routing; results are compared against the stable router to decide what merges. Falls back to nothing — this IS a full working router, just the experimental edge.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "question": "What is the current US unemployment rate?"
    },
    "name": "ask_pipeworx_beta"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`q`	No	Alias for question.
`ask`	No	Alias for question.
`text`	No	Alias for question.
`input`	No	Alias for question.
`packs`	No	OPTIONAL. Restrict routing to these pack slugs (e.g. ["sec-form-d","sec-13f"]) — the router then picks only from tools in those packs. Omit for the default full-catalog routing. Slugs come from list_packs / search_packs / https://pipeworx.io/directory; unlisted or unknown slugs are ignored and named in _meta.pack_scope.ignored, and if none of them resolves the question is routed across the whole catalog with _meta.pack_scope.full_catalog:true (never an empty answer).
`query`	No	Alias for question.
`prompt`	No	Alias for question.
`message`	No	Alias for question.
`question`	Yes	Your question or request in natural language. Accepts query, q, prompt, text, input, ask, message as aliases.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 13, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / ask

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for question.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / message

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for question.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / packs

Added value: +{
+  "description": "OPTIONAL. Restrict routing to these pack slugs (e.g. [\"sec-form-d\",\"sec-13f\"]) — the router then picks only from tools in those packs. Omit for the default full-catalog routing. Slugs come from list_packs / search_packs / https://pipeworx.io/directory; unlisted or unknown slugs are ignored and named in _meta.pack_scope.ignored, and if none of them resolves the question is routed across the whole catalog with _meta.pack_scope.full_catalog:true (never an empty answer).",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / question / description

Previous value: -"Your question or request in natural language. Accepts query, q, prompt, text, input as aliases."New value: +"Your question or request in natural language. Accepts query, q, prompt, text, input, ask, message as aliases."

Changed1 schema field changedSep 19, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "question": "What is the current US unemployment rate?"
+  }
+]

AddedJul 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive, so the safety bar is met. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: there is no fallback to the stable router ('this IS a full working router'), candidates change live, and results are compared against the stable router to decide merges. It does not describe latency, cost, or failure modes, keeping it short of 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?

Front-loaded with the key identity ('Beta version of ask_pipeworx') and the delta (candidate routing), then the usage rule, then the anti-confusion clarification. Slight redundancy in the parenthetical repetition of 'same ... same ... same' and the multi-clause final sentence, but nothing is wasted outright.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description states the response shape matches ask_pipeworx and explains routing/pack scoping fallbacks, which covers what the agent needs to call it correctly. The only missing piece is guidance on choosing the stable tool when no candidate is active.

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%, including the alias list and the detailed packs scoping semantics with _meta.pack_scope fallbacks, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond calling the arguments identical to ask_pipeworx. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('universal router' with 7,397 tools) and immediately distinguishes it from its sibling by declaring it identical to ask_pipeworx except for candidate routing. An agent can tell exactly what this tool is and how it differs from ask_pipeworx without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly says to use it 'exactly like ask_pipeworx when you want the newest routing' and explains the purpose (A/B comparison against the stable router). The caveat that no candidate is active right now means it currently duplicates ask_pipeworx, but the description never tells the agent whether to prefer the stable tool in that state — a mild gap rather than a missing alternative.

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

All Gsa Auctions 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.