Skip to main content
Glama
plopez053

ayudas-es-mcp

by plopez053
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Contar y comparar ayudas

ayudas_recuento
Read-onlyIdempotent

Count and rank Spanish public grant and subsidy calls by region, purpose, beneficiary, instrument, agency, month, or year, with date and title filters.

Instructions

Recuentos y rankings EXACTOS de convocatorias de ayudas, agrupados por comunidad, finalidad, beneficiario, instrumento, administración, órgano convocante, mes o año. Ejemplos: '¿qué comunidad convoca más ayudas de vivienda este año?' → agrupar_por 'comunidad', finalidad 'vivienda', desde '2026-01-01'; '¿cuántas ayudas para pymes ha habido cada mes?' → agrupar_por 'mes', beneficiario 'autonomo-o-pyme'. Agrupar por comunidad o finalidad hace una consulta a la BDNS por grupo: unos 20 s la primera vez, inmediato al repetirla.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
desdeNoRegistradas desde esta fecha (YYYY-MM-DD)
hastaNoRegistradas hasta esta fecha (YYYY-MM-DD)
textoNoPalabras que deben aparecer todas en el título (también en euskera, catalán o gallego). Admite singular/plural; con '*' busca por prefijo (p. ej. 'digital*').
limiteNoGrupos a mostrar. Por defecto 20
comunidadNoComunidad autónoma (incluye sus provincias y municipios)
finalidadNoFinalidad o sector de la ayuda
agrupar_porYes
instrumentoNoTipo de ayuda: subvención, préstamo, garantía...
beneficiarioNo'autonomo-o-pyme' = autónomos, pymes y personas con actividad económica; 'entidad-sin-actividad-economica' = asociaciones, fundaciones, entidades públicas; 'particular' = personas físicas sin actividad económica.
administracionNoNivel de la administración convocante
excluir_directasNoExcluir las concesiones directas y nominativas (no se pueden solicitar). Usa el tipo exacto cuando se conoce y, si no, una estimación por el título (precisión ~97 %, detecta ~67 %).
incluir_estatalesNoCon 'comunidad', incluir también las ayudas de ámbito nacional. Por defecto true.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.7.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, open-world behavior. The description adds useful operational context: grouping by comunidad or finalidad triggers one BDNS query per group, taking about 20 seconds initially and being immediate on repeat.

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 front-loaded with purpose, then examples, then performance. Every sentence carries useful information and there is no filler.

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 12 parameters and no output schema, the description does well by explaining that it returns exact counts/rankings grouped by dimension. It could be slightly more explicit about the returned structure or grouping limits, but it is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 high at 92%, so most parameter meaning is already documented. The description still adds value by giving example parameter combinations and clarifying the grouping behavior that drives latency.

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 and resource: exact counts and rankings of grant calls, grouped by named dimensions. It clearly distinguishes aggregate counting from sibling search/detail tools, and the examples make the intended output obvious.

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?

Provides explicit example questions and maps them to concrete parameters, giving clear context for when to use the tool. It does not name alternatives such as ayudas_buscar or give when-not-to-use guidance, so it falls short of a 5.

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