opendata-ua-mcp

track_updates

Monitor recently updated datasets on Ukraine's open data portal. Filter by topic or organization to get a compact list of changes.

Instructions

Стрічка нещодавно оновлених датасетів на data.gov.ua (моніторинг). Можна звузити за темою або розпорядником. Повертає компактний список: назва, розпорядник, коли змінено, тип зміни, посилання.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "track_updates"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`topic`	No	Фільтр за словом у назві датасету
`organization`	No	Фільтр за назвою/slug розпорядника
`limit`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 21, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output format (compact list with name, administrator, change time, change type, link). However, it does not mention any behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or side effects, which is acceptable for a read-like monitoring tool but still a gap.

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?

The description is very concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second describes the output. No extraneous information, front-loaded effectively.

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?

Given three parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, filter options, and return fields. It omits details like ordering or default limit behavior, but is largely complete for a simple monitoring 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 coverage is 67% (topic and organization have descriptions; limit has default/min/max but no description). The description adds context about the output but does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. It partially compensates for the missing limit description by implying its role in the list.

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?

The description clearly states it tracks recent dataset updates on data.gov.ua (monitoring). It uses specific verb-resource (track updates) and distinguishes from siblings like 'explore_catalog' and 'find_datasets' by focusing on change monitoring.

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 description mentions narrowing by topic or organization, implying when to filter. However, it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it name alternatives among the sibling tools.

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

Deploy Server