Skip to main content
Glama

Simap

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Simap Project

simap_project
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch the full detail of one Swiss public procurement publication from simap.ch by project_id + publication_id (both UUIDs returned by simap_search / simap_recent). Returns the shaped notice: title, description, CPV classification, procedure and order type, procurement office with full address/email/phone, and for award publications the winning vendor(s) with CHF price, number of submitted offers, and award justification.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
langNoLanguage: "de" (default), "fr", "it", or "en".
project_idYesProject UUID, e.g. "feca42bc-5ef4-492f-88c6-e6622940026c".
publication_idYesPublication UUID, e.g. "3d50c790-644c-4aa1-9fd2-ac7207bdcdcd".

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "project_id": "feca42bc-5ef4-492f-88c6-e6622940026c",
+    "publication_id": "3d50c790-644c-4aa1-9fd2-ac7207bdcdcd"
+  },
+  {
+    "lang": "fr",
+    "project_id": "a1b2c3d4-e5f6-7890-abcd-ef1234567890",
+    "publication_id": "b2c3d4e5-f6a7-8901-bcde-f12345678901"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint false. The description adds valuable behavioral details: what is returned (shaped notice including title, description, CPV classification, etc.) and specifics for award publications. No contradictions.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys purpose, input requirements, and output details without wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description thoroughly explains the return fields, including specific details for award publications. Combined with sibling tool references, it provides complete context for an agent to use the tool 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% with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds context that the IDs are UUIDs from sibling tools, which aids understanding beyond the schema. Baseline 3, increased due to added value.

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 states the tool fetches the full detail of one Swiss public procurement publication from simap.ch by project_id and publication_id. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like simap_search and simap_recent by focusing on a single publication's details.

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?

The description explains that the IDs are returned by simap_search or simap_recent, indicating when to use this tool (after search/recent). It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context is clear and provides actionable guidance.

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

All Simap 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

There are several tools with overlapping query responsibilities: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded are near-variants of the same router, and bet_research, polymarket_edges, and polymarket_arbitrage all target prediction-market opportunity discovery. An agent must read the long descriptions carefully to distinguish them, and some variants are behaviorally identical today.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are readable snake_case, but the verb_noun convention is not consistently applied: some are clean verb phrases like validate_claim and discover_tools, while others are noun phrases like entity_profile, recent_alerts, or simap_project. The prefixed groups (polymarket_*, pipeworx_*) help, but the overall naming style is mixed.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is above the heavy range, and the set is inflated by redundant router variants, five overlapping Polymarket tools, and loosely related utilities like generate_llms_txt and scan_dependency. The server is named Simap but only three tools relate to Swiss procurement, making the scope feel bloated and misaligned.

Completeness4/5

For an information-retrieval-style server, the core workflows are well covered: discovery, routing, grounded answers, entity resolution, profiles, comparisons, fact-checking, subscriptions, and memory. The main gaps are minor, such as updating a subscription in place or deeper native Simap-specific actions, and those can be worked around.

Resources