Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Conecto

by chat.conecto
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Look up a company's profile

companies_get
Read-onlyIdempotent

A company's record in its register: legal name and form, status, founding date, address, industry codes with their NACE label (NACE Rev. 2.1 for Norway and newer Finnish filings, with rev2: the Rev. 2 codes the other tools take), employees where published, VAT numbers, its LEI, and its officers by name and role (never birth dates or contacts). US companies add tickers and recent filings. Each fact comes with its register, link and license. Costs $0.05 per call; nothing if it fails.

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": {
      "company": "<company>"
    },
    "name": "companies_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
companyYesA company id from companies_search: fr:306138900, gb:08123456, no:923609016, fi:1927400-1, us:769520 or lei:529900K139N6UFJ1A758.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only, idempotent annotations, the description adds material behavioral facts: exact pricing ($0.05 per call), no charge on failure, provenance for each fact (register, link, license), privacy boundaries (officers exclude birth dates and contacts), and regional variations such as US tickers and filings. This is unusually rich context for an agent deciding whether and how to call the tool.

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 the core resource, then efficiently covers notable field variations, provenance, and cost. Despite the density of the long first sentence, every clause 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?

With no output schema, the description does substantial work by listing returned fields, regional additions, privacy exclusions, provenance, and failure cost. It is nearly complete, but it does not clarify its relationship to closely related sibling tools such as companies_owners, companies_financials, or lookup_company.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the schema already explains that the sole parameter is a company id sourced from companies_search with multiple format examples. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the resource as a company register record and enumerates the profile fields it returns, so an agent knows this is not a search or financials tool. It stops short of explicitly stating the retrieval verb and does not directly differentiate itself from siblings such as companies_owners or lookup_company.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives almost no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The only routing clue, that a company id comes from companies_search, lives in the schema parameter description rather than the tool description, and alternatives like companies_owners or companies_financials are never addressed.

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

All Conecto toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources