Skip to main content
Glama
Digilac

simap MCP Server

by Digilac
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_tender_details

Retrieve detailed information about a specific Swiss public tender from simap.ch by providing its project ID, with optional language and publication selection.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a specific tender

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
langNoPreferred languageen
fullRawNoInclude the complete unmodified API response as JSON at the end of the output. Verbose — only enable when the structured fields are insufficient.
projectIdYesProject ID (UUID)
publicationIdNoPublication ID (UUID). Defaults to the project's latest publication when omitted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / publicationId / description
      Previous value: -"Publication ID (UUID)"New value: +"Publication ID (UUID). Defaults to the project's latest publication when omitted."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "projectId",
-  "publicationId"
-]New value: +[
+  "projectId"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.4.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about read-only nature, permissions, or what happens when publicationId is omitted. It also says nothing about the shape or volume of the returned details.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is a single short sentence with no wasted words, which is efficient, but the extreme brevity means it is under-specified rather than genuinely well-structured. Minimal but not misleading.

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?

With no output schema and no annotation coverage, the description should describe what 'detailed information' actually contains, but it does not. For a detail-fetching tool, this leaves the agent without the information needed to know what it will get back.

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%, with lang, fullRaw, projectId and publicationId all documented in the schema itself, including the fullRaw verbosity warning. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already supplies, so the 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?

The description states a clear verb (Get) and resource (detailed information about a specific tender), scoping it to a single record. However it does not distinguish this from the sibling search_tenders or get_publication_history, so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus search_tenders or get_publication_history, nor any mention of prerequisites such as needing a projectId first. The single sentence offers no usage context beyond the bare purpose.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools