erp-mcp

search_vendors

Read-only

Find vendors by partial name or tax number to retrieve up to 10 matching records for purchasing and invoice workflows.

Instructions

Find vendors by name or tax number. Returns at most 10 matches.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_vendors"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	Part of the vendor name, or a tax number

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral fact, the 10-match cap, which warns the agent about truncation. However it does not say whether results are ranked or what to do when the cap is hit, leaving the main behavioral question unanswered.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the lookup keys front-loaded and the result cap as the second beat. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the tool is a simple single-parameter read. The description plus schema covers lookup keys and result limits, with only minor gaps around match ranking and truncation handling.

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?

With one parameter and 100% schema description coverage, the schema already explains that query is 'part of the vendor name, or a tax number'. The description restates the same two lookup modes without adding format details such as case sensitivity or minimum match behavior, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (find/search) and resource (vendors) plus the two lookup keys, name and tax number. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling tools, which all deal with purchase orders and invoices rather than vendor lookup, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The query semantics (name fragment or tax number) imply the lookup use case, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance and no mention of an alternative such as a create/list vendor tool. An agent can infer the intent but is given no routing rule.

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

Deploy Server