Skip to main content
Glama

Open Contracting

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Oc Process History

oc_process_history
Read-onlyIdempotent

Full release history for a single contracting process, looked up by its OCID (Open Contracting ID, as returned by oc_tender_search / oc_recent). Returns every OCDS release in chronological order, showing the tender → award → contract progression: planning and tender notices, deadline changes, and the eventual award with supplier and amount. Use it to trace how a specific government tender played out.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ocidYesThe Open Contracting ID of the process, e.g. "ocds-abc123-000-00001".

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds behavioral detail beyond them: results are ordered chronologically, include all releases, and reveal the tender-award-contract progression. This helps an agent set expectations about the shape and ordering of the response.

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?

Three sentences, no filler, main purpose front-loaded, and each sentence contributes a distinct fact (input, output, use case). Ideal size for a simple read tool.

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?

Given the low complexity (one param, no output schema), the description covers all essential information: how to obtain the input, what the output contains, ordering, and when to use it. The annotations cover safety, leaving no critical 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% (ocid is described), but the description adds provenance ('as returned by oc_tender_search / oc_recent') and explains the role of OCID in identifying a single process, which is meaningful for the one parameter.

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?

Description states a specific verb-resource pair ('returns every OCDS release... for a single contracting process') and identifies the key input (OCID). It differentiates from sibling search tools by emphasizing a single-process pull versus oc_tender_search/oc_recent, and clearly explains the output value.

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 implies when to use by saying 'Use it to trace how a specific government tender played out' and points to oc_tender_search/oc_recent as the source of the OCID, signaling the preceding step. It lacks an explicit exclusion statement (e.g., 'do not use for listing'), but the context is clear enough.

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

All Open Contracting 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tool clusters overlap heavily: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, discover_tools, and suggest_questions all serve query/discovery purposes; polymarket_edges, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edge_tracker, polymarket_fill_risk, and bet_research all target prediction-market opportunity detection. ask_pipeworx_beta is explicitly identical to ask_pipeworx right now, making the distinction essentially invisible without deep description parsing.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names mix domain prefixes (oc_*, polymarket_*, pipeworx_*), action verbs (validate_claim, resolve_entity, generate_llms_txt), and plain nouns (entity_profile, recent_alerts, recent_changes). Most are readable snake_case, but there is no uniform verb_noun or domain-first convention, so the set feels stylistically fragmented rather than patterned.

Tool Count2/5

35 tools is a heavy surface for a server ostensibly named 'Open Contracting' — only 4 of the 35 tools actually relate to open contracting data. The rest sprawl across general data lookup, prediction markets, memory, subscriptions, npm scanning, and AI visibility, making the tool count feel bloated and unfocused relative to the stated purpose.

Completeness2/5

For the open-contracting domain implied by the server name, the surface is incomplete: there is coverage metadata, search, recent releases, and process history, but no direct retrieval of a single release by ID and no broader OCDS exploration tools. As a general data/Pipeworx toolkit the coverage is wide, but the severe mismatch between the server name and the actual tool set creates a significant gap between expectation and capability.

Resources