Skip to main content
Glama

Chile Procurement

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Entity Profile

entity_profile
Read-onlyIdempotent

"Tell me about X" / "research Acme" / "brief me on Tesla" / "what does Apple do" / "company profile for Microsoft" / "give me the rundown on NVDA" / "everything you know about $TICKER" — full cross-source profile of a US public company in ONE parallel call. ALWAYS PREFER over chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups when the user asks for a holistic view. Fans out across SEC EDGAR, XBRL, USPTO patents, federal contracts (USAspending), FDA-licensed biologics (Purple Book), H-1B hiring (DOL LCA), news and GLEIF, and returns: cik + company_name (+ resolved_from/resolved_to when value was a name); recent_filings (up to 5 with pipeworx://edgar/company/{cik}/filings/{accession} URIs); fundamentals (LATEST 10-K Revenues + NetIncomeLoss + Cash, sorted period_end DESC); patents (USPTO PatentsView API sunset May 2025 — soft-fails until reactivated); federal_contracts (USAspending awards where the company is the recipient); fda_products (FDA-licensed biologics — vaccines, cell/gene therapies — from the Purple Book; a company with only small-molecule/generic drugs will show none here, that is expected, not a failure); hiring (H-1B sponsorship volume + salary range from DOL LCA filings); recent news mentions via GDELT→GNews fallback; LEI via GLEIF. sources_used / sources_failed say which of these actually returned data for THIS company — an empty section is a real "no data", not a bug. Pass a ticker ("AAPL"), zero-padded CIK ("0000320193"), OR a company name ("Moderna") — names now resolve via SEC EDGAR's company-name match; a private company (no CIK/ticker) returns resolved:false with an explicit notes line, not a bare failure. type accepts "company" or "ticker" interchangeably — both take the same value shapes above.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYes"company" or "ticker" — both are accepted and behave identically; `value` can be a ticker, CIK, or company name either way. person/place coming soon.
valueYesTicker (e.g., "AAPL"), zero-padded CIK (e.g., "0000320193"), or company name (e.g., "Moderna") — names resolve via SEC EDGAR company-name match.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / description
      Previous value: -"Entity type. Only \"company\" supported today; person/place coming soon."New value: +"\"company\" or \"ticker\" — both are accepted and behave identically; `value` can be a ticker, CIK, or company name either way. person/place coming soon."
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "company"
-]New value: +[
+  "company",
+  "ticker"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / value / description
      Previous value: -"Ticker (e.g., \"AAPL\") or zero-padded CIK (e.g., \"0000320193\"). Names not supported — use resolve_entity first if you only have a name."New value: +"Ticker (e.g., \"AAPL\"), zero-padded CIK (e.g., \"0000320193\"), or company name (e.g., \"Moderna\") — names resolve via SEC EDGAR company-name match."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description richly discloses behaviors beyond the readOnly/openWorld/idempotent annotations: it covers soft-fail behavior for the USPTO sunset, expected empty FDA sections, GDELT→GNews fallback, sources_used/sources_failed semantics, and the resolved:false path for private companies. This gives an agent accurate expectations about data presence and failure modes.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is long and dense, but almost every sentence carries useful behavioral or usage information. It is front-loaded with example queries and a strong preference directive. Minor redundancy exists, such as repeating the type/value interchangeability already present in the schema, but the overall structure serves a complex tool well.

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?

With no output schema present, the description carries the full burden of explaining return values, and it does so thoroughly: CIK and company_name, resolved_from/resolved_to, recent_filings with URIs, fundamentals fields, each source section, and sources_used/sources_failed. It also covers edge cases and expected empty results, making the tool's behavior fully discoverable.

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?

The schema already covers both parameters at 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantic detail beyond the schema: names resolve via SEC EDGAR, private companies yield resolved:false with a notes line, and type accepts company/ticker interchangeably. This is genuinely helpful, though somewhat redundant with the schema.

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 identifies the tool as a full cross-source profile generator for US public companies, with concrete example queries like "Tell me about X" and "give me the rundown on NVDA." It distinguishes itself from chained single-source lookups and conveys that it is the preferred holistic-research tool.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly says to ALWAYS PREFER this tool over chaining single-pack SEC/XBRL/news lookups when a holistic view is requested. It also gives precise accepted input forms (ticker, CIK, company name) and explains the private-company fallback behavior, leaving little ambiguity about when and how to invoke it.

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

All Chile Procurement toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools are distinct, but the ask_pipeworx family (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded) heavily overlaps—the beta is explicitly identical to the stable version. The two Chile-specific tools are clear, but the presence of numerous unrelated data tools creates confusion about which tool serves the server's purported purpose.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming is inconsistent: some tools follow verb_noun snake_case (chile_get_tender, chile_search_tenders), others use plain verbs (ask_pipeworx) or noun_verb patterns (polymarket_arbitrage, entity_profile). Mixed conventions and varying levels of specificity make the set feel uncoordinated.

Tool Count2/5

33 tools is excessive for a server named 'Chile Procurement'—only two tools relate to Chile procurement, while the rest are generic Pipeworx data utilities. The count is not scoped to the server's stated purpose; it appears to be a bundled general-purpose toolkit rather than a focused procurement interface.

Completeness2/5

For Chile procurement, only search and get-detail are provided; there is no ability to list all historical tenders, filter by category or amount, or track bidding. The read-only surface covers basic retrieval but lacks common procurement workflows. The broader data tools are complete individually but irrelevant to the server's domain.

Resources