Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
edwin042331-hue

dgcp-mcp-server

by edwin042331-hue
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Simulador de precio y puntuacion economica

dgcp_simulador_puntuacion
Read-onlyIdempotent

Simulate tender price scenarios with inverse proportionality scoring, show margin and total score, and recommend the bid that maximizes points while respecting your minimum margin.

Instructions

Simula escenarios de precio (85% a 100% del presupuesto) con la formula de proporcionalidad inversa usada en los pliegos: puntos = (precio minimo / precio ofertado) x puntos maximos. Muestra margen y puntaje total por escenario y recomienda el que maximiza el puntaje respetando tu margen minimo. Para precios rivales reales usa dgcp_buscar_ofertas (ofertas de procesos similares) o dgcp_precios_referencia. Verifica siempre la formula exacta en el pliego.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
costo_totalYesTu costo total de ejecucion (DOP).
peso_tecnico_maxNoPuntos maximos tecnicos segun el pliego (default 70).
margen_minimo_pctNoMargen minimo aceptable en % (default 8).
monto_referencialYesPresupuesto estimado oficial (DOP).
peso_economico_maxNoPuntos maximos economicos segun el pliego (default 30).
precios_competidoresNoPrecios esperados o historicos de rivales (ver dgcp_buscar_ofertas / dgcp_precios_referencia).
puntaje_tecnico_esperadoNoPuntos tecnicos que esperas obtener (default 70).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed13 schema fields changedv5.0.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / costo_ejecucion_base
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Tus costos reales directos e indirectos de ejecucion en DOP.",
-  "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
-  "type": "number"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / costo_total
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Tu costo total de ejecucion (DOP).",
+  "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / margen_minimo_pct
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Margen minimo aceptable en % (default 8).",
+  "maximum": 90,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / monto_referencial / description
      Previous value: -"Monto estimado oficial del proceso en DOP."New value: +"Presupuesto estimado oficial (DOP)."
    • removedInput schema / properties / peso_economico_max / default
      Removed value: -30
    • changedInput schema / properties / peso_economico_max / description
      Previous value: -"Puntos maximos del Sobre Economico segun pliego (default 30)."New value: +"Puntos maximos economicos segun el pliego (default 30)."
    • removedInput schema / properties / peso_tecnico_max / default
      Removed value: -70
    • changedInput schema / properties / peso_tecnico_max / description
      Previous value: -"Puntos maximos del Sobre Tecnico segun pliego (default 70)."New value: +"Puntos maximos tecnicos segun el pliego (default 70)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / precios_competidores / description
      Previous value: -"Array con precios estimados o historicos de competidores (opcional)."New value: +"Precios esperados o historicos de rivales (ver dgcp_buscar_ofertas / dgcp_precios_referencia)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / precios_competidores / items / exclusiveMinimum
      Added value: +0
    • removedInput schema / properties / puntaje_tecnico_esperado / default
      Removed value: -70
    • changedInput schema / properties / puntaje_tecnico_esperado / description
      Previous value: -"Puntos que esperas obtener en el Sobre A (default 70)."New value: +"Puntos tecnicos que esperas obtener (default 70)."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "monto_referencial",
-  "costo_ejecucion_base"
-]New value: +[
+  "monto_referencial",
+  "costo_total"
+]
  2. First observedv4.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish a safe, idempotent, closed-world read, so the description's job is to add substance. It does: it discloses the exact scoring formula, the 85%-100% search band, what each scenario returns (margin and total score), and that the recommendation respects the user's minimum margin — none of which is visible in the schema or annotations.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action and formula, followed by the output/recommendation, then the sibling routing and the verification caveat. No filler and nothing redundant with the schema.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 7-parameter tool with no output schema, the description compensates by describing the return content (per-scenario margin and score, plus a recommendation) and the scoring logic. All inputs are documented in the schema, so the agent has what it needs to call this correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning about how inputs are used: the scenario band relates to monto_referencial, and it tells the agent where precios_competidores values should come from rather than being invented. It does not clarify peso_economico vs peso_tecnico interaction, so it is not a full 5.

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?

Names a specific verb and artifact: it simulates price scenarios between 85% and 100% of the budget using the inverse-proportionality formula, and outputs margin plus total score per scenario with a recommendation. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by pointing at dgcp_buscar_ofertas and dgcp_precios_referencia as the tools for real rival prices.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly routes the agent: 'Para precios rivales reales usa dgcp_buscar_ofertas ... o dgcp_precios_referencia', which tells it when this simulator is the wrong source of data. It also warns to verify the exact formula in the pliego, but does not state when the simulator should be skipped entirely.

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