tenders_search
Search public tenders by text, CPV prefix, budget range, deadline.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cpv | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| query | No | ||
| max_budget | No | ||
| min_budget | No | ||
| deadline_after | No |
Search public tenders by text, CPV prefix, budget range, deadline.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cpv | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| query | No | ||
| max_budget | No | ||
| min_budget | No | ||
| deadline_after | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any side effects, or rate limits. Only implies a non-mutating search.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single, tightly worded sentence conveys the tool's purpose and key parameters without any filler or redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the absence of an output schema, the description does not mention result format, pagination, or sorting. For a search tool, this leaves some ambiguity, but the essential entry-point information is present.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema has 0% description coverage, but the description maps most parameters to search criteria (text→query, CPV→cpv, budget range→min/max_budget, deadline→deadline_after). It omits 'limit' and does not explain value formats (e.g., date format, budget units).
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb ('search'), specific resource ('public tenders'), and lists the four main filtering criteria. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools that target different datasets (BOE, INE).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Lists the available search dimensions but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings. However, the domain difference is obvious, so some implicit guidance exists.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.