hptsu-mcp

search_declarations

Search declarations of conformity (ТР ТС / ТР ЕАЭС).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	1-based page index.
`number`	No	Declaration number, full or partial.
`scheme`	No	Declaration scheme — '1д'…'6д'.
`status`	No	Declaration status code.
`product`	No	Product full name, full or partial.
`applicant`	No	Applicant name, full or partial.
`page_size`	No	Rows per page (max 50).
`regulations`	No	Technical regulation code (e.g. 'ТР ТС 018/2011').
`manufacturer`	No	Manufacturer name, full or partial.
`applicant_inn`	No	Applicant INN (exact match).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedJul 15, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / applicant / description

Previous value: -"Applicant name (icontains)."New value: +"Applicant name, full or partial."

changedInput schema / properties / manufacturer / description

Previous value: -"Manufacturer name (icontains)."New value: +"Manufacturer name, full or partial."

changedInput schema / properties / product / description

Previous value: -"Product full name (icontains)."New value: +"Product full name, full or partial."

First observedJul 12, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action and regulatory context, omitting important details such as read-only nature, pagination behavior, result structure, or any prerequisites. This is insufficient for an agent.

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 front-loaded sentence that is efficient and to the point. While very short, it earns its place, though it could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool has 10 parameters, no annotations, and many siblings, the description is incomplete. It lacks context about what declarations are, how results are structured, and how to effectively use the parameters. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for this lack of guidance.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema; it mentions the regulatory scope but does not clarify parameter usage, relationships, or typical patterns.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it searches declarations of conformity and specifies the regulatory frameworks (ТР ТС / ТР ЕАЭС), providing a specific verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like search_certificates or search_documents, leaving potential ambiguity.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives. With many sibling search tools, the description should clarify scenarios for using search_declarations versus others, but it does not.

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

All hptsu-mcp 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.