qune-tech/ocds-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create_company_profile

Create a company profile with name, description, CPV codes, categories, and location to enable automated tender matching via semantic embedding of the description.

Instructions

Create a company profile for tender matching. Store company name, description, CPV codes, categories, and location. The description is automatically embedded for semantic matching if the embedder is loaded. Returns the profile ID and embedding status.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "description": "<description>"
    },
    "name": "create_company_profile"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`categories`	No	Procurement categories of interest (e.g. ['works', 'services', 'goods'])
`cpv_codes`	No	CPV codes the company is interested in (e.g. ['45000000', '72000000'])
`description`	Yes	Description of the company's activities, products, and services. German text recommended for best matching quality.
`location`	No	Company location (e.g. 'Berlin, Germany')
`name`	Yes	Company name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Mar 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Describes automatic embedding behavior and return of profile ID and embedding status. No annotations provided, so description carries burden; it's informative but lacks error conditions or idempotency details.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with main action. No redundant information.

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?

Covers purpose, stored data, behavioral side effect, and return values. Lacks details on required auth or error handling, but adequate for a create tool.

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%, but description adds value: explains that description is auto-embedded and recommends German text. This goes beyond schema definitions.

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?

Clearly states the tool creates a company profile for tender matching, listing stored fields (name, description, CPV codes, categories, location) and mentioning automatic embedding. Distinguishes from sibling tools like delete, get, update, match_tenders.

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?

Implies usage for creating profiles for tender matching. Recommends German text for better quality, indicating context of use. No explicit when-not or alternatives, but purpose is self-evident.

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

Deploy Server