Skip to main content
Glama

Krasoft Russian Public Procurement

by ru.krasoft

KPI-сводка исполнений контрактов

executions_summary
Read-only

Агрегированная сводка по позициям исполнения контрактов под заданным фильтром: totalSum — сумма позиций, totalQty — количество, totalPaid — фактически оплачено, contracts — число контрактов, suppliers — число поставщиков. Список позиций не возвращает — только KPI; подходит для оценки объёма рынка и доли поставщика. Квоты: аноним — 20 поисков и 50 карточек в сутки; бесплатный аккаунт (ключ krsp_ с zakupki.krasoft.ru/me) — 100 поисков и 200 карточек; платный тариф — без лимитов. При превышении инструмент вернёт isError с инструкцией.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fzNoЗакон: 44 и/или 223
queryNoТекст поиска по позиции исполнения и контракту
periodNoПериод публикации записи об исполнении: "2y" (default) — последние 2 года, "5y" — 5 лет, "older" — старше 5 лет, "all" — весь корпус (медленнее)2y
okpdCodeNoКод ОКПД2 позиции (префиксный матч, напр. "21.20")
productNameNoНаименование товара/услуги (поиск только по названию позиции)
regionCodesNoКоды регионов РФ: 2 цифры ("77" — Москва) либо полный 13-значный код
customerInnsNoИНН заказчиков
supplierInnsNoИНН поставщиков

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / regionCodes / description
      Previous value: -"Коды регионов РФ (2 цифры)"New value: +"Коды регионов РФ: 2 цифры (\"77\" — Москва) либо полный 13-значный код"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds value beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by specifying the exact KPIs returned, that no item list is returned, and includes quota limits and error behavior. It does not disclose potential performance implications or data freshness.

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 well-structured with key information first (aggregated summary, KPIs) followed by usage and quotas. It is moderately concise; the quota details are useful but could be considered slightly verbose.

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?

The description covers the tool's return values (KPIs), what it does not return, and provides quota information. Given the absence of an output schema, this is sufficient for basic understanding, though deeper behavioral details (e.g., pagination, response structure) are 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?

All 8 parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description briefly mentions that query searches by position and contract, and productName searches by position name, but adds minimal extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 it is an aggregated summary of contract execution items, listing specific KPIs (totalSum, totalQty, etc.) and explicitly distinguishes itself from tools that return lists of items. The title 'KPI-сводка' reinforces the purpose.

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 explains that the tool returns only KPIs and is suitable for market volume and supplier share assessment, providing implicit guidance on when to use. It also mentions quota limits, but does not explicitly compare with sibling tools or state when not to use.

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

All Krasoft Russian Public Procurement 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct aspect: customer profiles, execution summaries, contract cards, tender cards, market snapshots, and searches for specs, objects, and tenders. No two tools have overlapping purposes.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names mostly follow a verb_noun or noun_noun pattern (e.g., search_tenders, get_contract, market_snapshot). However, there is minor inconsistency with 'executions_summary' and 'market_snapshot' not using a verb prefix like the others.

Tool Count5/5

With 8 tools, the server covers search, retrieval, and aggregation for public procurement without being overwhelming or too sparse. Each tool serves a clear purpose.

Completeness4/5

The set covers search and retrieval for both tenders and contracts, plus profiles and aggregated summaries. Missing a dedicated supplier search tool, but the overall surface is solid for data access.

Resources