Skip to main content
Glama
EuroScrape

EuroScrape MCP server

Official
by EuroScrape
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

EU Public Tenders Scraper: TED, BOAMP, Awards & Tender Alerts

search_eu_public_tenders
Read-only

Search European and French public tenders and contract awards by keyword, CPV code, country, value and publication date, returning buyer, deadline, winner and bid details.

Instructions

Public tenders and contract awards in Europe (TED) and France (BOAMP, DECP) by keyword, CPV code and country: buyer, value in euros, deadline; for awards, the winner, the amount and the number of bids. Pay per result on your Apify account: run start $0.003, open tender delivered $0.003, contract award delivered $0.005.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNoOpen tenders: calls for tender you can still bid on (deadline, estimated value, buyer contact, documents link). Contract awards: who won which contract, for how much and against how many bids (winners with company details).
cpvCodesNoOfficial EU procurement categories, as codes or prefixes: "72" = IT services, "48" = software packages, "45" = construction work, "79" = business services, "90" = cleaning & environment, "33" = medical equipment, "71" = architecture & engineering. The most reliable filter across languages.
keywordsNoWords or phrases searched in the title, description, lots and official category of each notice. English keywords also find notices in other languages through their official category (e.g. "software" finds German, Polish or Spanish software tenders). For French national notices (BOAMP, DECP), add French keywords too (e.g. "logiciel"). Leave empty to get everything matching the other filters.
languageNoLanguage of the CPV category labels and of the TED links. Titles and descriptions stay in their original language.
maxItemsNoMaximum number of notices in the dataset (you pay per notice). Default here: 25.
countriesNoCountries of the buyer (2-letter codes). Leave empty for all of Europe (EU, EEA, Switzerland and candidate countries).
minValueEurNoEstimated value (tenders) or awarded value (awards), converted to euros.
frenchDepartmentsNoFrance only: department numbers, e.g. "69", "75", "2A", "974". Selecting departments limits the search to France.
publishedWithinDaysNoNotices published in the last N days. For daily monitoring, 2 or 3 days is enough.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description goes beyond them with concrete cost behavior: pay-per-result pricing ($0.003 per run start, $0.003 per open tender, $0.005 per award) and billing tied to maxItems. It does not cover pagination or rate limits, but the economic traits are the operationally important disclosure here.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and sources, followed by filter dimensions and price. Dense but no filler. The pricing roster is slightly list-heavy within a description, though it earns its place given pay-per-result billing.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields for both modes and disclosing cost per result, which an agent needs before setting maxItems. It omits result format and pagination details, keeping it short of fully complete for a 9-parameter, 0-required search tool.

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 9 parameters, including enum values and defaults. The description adds only a high-level echo of the filter axes (keyword, CPV, country) plus the maxItems default of 25, which is a small increment over the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb+resource (search public tenders and contract awards), names the data sources (TED, BOAMP, DECP), and enumerates the fields returned (buyer, value, deadline, winner, amount, bid count). No sibling tool overlaps, so differentiation is trivially satisfied.

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?

Usage is implied through the filter axes (keyword, CPV code, country) rather than stated as when-to-use guidance. There are no competing siblings that require routing, and the schema fields carry the how-to-use load, so this is adequate but not explicit.

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