Skip to main content
Glama
DweskZ

EcuDataMCP

by DweskZ
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Buscar procesos de contratación pública (SERCOP)

search_contratos
Read-only

Search Ecuador’s SERCOP public procurement records by keyword, year, buyer, or supplier to locate relevant contracts in OCDS data.

Instructions

Search SERCOP public procurement (OCDS) by keyword (min 3 characters), year, buyer or supplier.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoResults page (1-based)
yearNoContract year (2015–current).
buyerNoOptional buyer/institution keyword (min 3 chars)
queryYesKeyword (min 3 chars), e.g. "medicinas", "vialidad", "software"
formatNotext summary (default) or json structured result.text
supplierNoOptional supplier keyword (min 3 chars)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.13.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.10.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / buyer / description
      Added value: +"Optional buyer/institution keyword (min 3 chars)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / format / description
      Added value: +"text summary (default) or json structured result."
    • addedInput schema / properties / page / description
      Added value: +"Results page (1-based)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / query / description
      Added value: +"Keyword (min 3 chars), e.g. \"medicinas\", \"vialidad\", \"software\""
    • addedInput schema / properties / supplier / description
      Added value: +"Optional supplier keyword (min 3 chars)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / year / description
      Added value: +"Contract year (2015–current)."
  3. Changed8 schema fields changedv0.8.14
    • removedInput schema / properties / buyer / title
      Removed value: -"Buyer"
    • removedInput schema / properties / format / title
      Removed value: -"Format"
    • removedInput schema / properties / page / title
      Removed value: -"Page"
    • removedInput schema / properties / query / title
      Removed value: -"Query"
    • removedInput schema / properties / supplier / title
      Removed value: -"Supplier"
    • removedInput schema / properties / year / title
      Removed value: -"Year"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"search_contratosArguments"
    • removedOutput schema / title
      Removed value: -"search_contratosDictOutput"
  4. First observedv0.8.12

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety and scope profile is covered. The description adds the minimum keyword length constraint (min 3 characters), which is useful operational context, but it says nothing about pagination behavior, rate limits, or result shape.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the search facets are listed compactly and the min-length constraint is inline. It is efficiently sized, though very terse for a six-parameter tool.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a moderately complex search tool with six parameters, the description is minimal but the schema carries full parameter documentation and annotations cover the safety profile. It omits any mention of the page and format parameters or expected result nature, so it is adequate rather than complete.

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 the schema already documents all six parameters including defaults, the year range, and the format enum. The description merely restates the same facets (keyword, year, buyer, supplier) without adding format syntax or examples, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (Search) and resource (SERCOP public procurement, OCDS) plus the facets it searches by, so the agent immediately knows what the tool does. It is clearly distinct from data-lookup siblings like get_contrato_info, though it never explicitly names that sibling as the detail-lookup counterpart.

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?

The description says what can be searched but never states when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_contrato_info or search_organizations. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or routing hints, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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