List CanadaBuys and Alberta APC opportunities closing soon.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| days | No | Show opportunities closing within N days (default 30) | |
| limit | No | Maximum combined results (default 20, max 50) | |
| source | No | all, federal, or alberta | all |
| category | No | Optional category filter | |
| province | No | Optional province or delivery region filter |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It fails to disclose behavioral traits such as that it is read-only, authorization needs, rate limits, or default behaviors like ordering or pagination. The description only states the basic action without additional context.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence with no wasted words. However, given the tool has 5 parameters and multiple sources, a slightly longer description could add value without being verbose. It is concise but not optimally informative.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description is minimal and does not explain the combination logic of two sources, default behaviors, or return format. With 5 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks sufficient context for an AI agent to use the tool effectively.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters like days, limit, and source.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states the tool lists specific opportunity types (CanadaBuys and Alberta APC) closing soon, using a specific verb 'list'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_alberta_deadlines (only Alberta) and list_upcoming_deadlines (possibly broader).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage context (when opportunities are closing soon) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_alberta_deadlines or list_upcoming_deadlines. No exclusions or when-not-to-use information is given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Many tools have overlapping purposes, e.g., multiple search/find tools (find_opportunities, find_matching_opportunities, search_opportunities, etc.) and detail retrieval tools (get_opportunity_details, get_alberta_opportunity_details, get_contract_details). This creates ambiguity for an agent to select the correct tool.
Most tools follow a verb_noun convention in snake_case (e.g., search_contracts, watch_opportunity). Some deviations like bid_no_bid_scorecard use a multi-word verb, but overall the pattern is consistent.
25 tools is on the higher side for this domain. While the number could be justified by the need to handle both federal and provincial opportunities, many tools are redundant, making the surface feel heavy.
Core workflows (search, get details, watch/unwatch, set/profile, analyze) are covered. Minor gaps exist, like no batch operations or tool to clear watchlist, but the surface is largely complete for contract tracking.
