Leadgen ONRC Romania

Watch a company for changes

watch_company

Idempotent

Register a company (by CUI) to monitor. Stores a fingerprint of its current registry record as the baseline; poll_watchlist then reports changes between monthly ONRC snapshots - a new director, a new CAEN activity, an address or status change - and when ANAF declares it fiscally inactive or its VAT status flips.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cui`	Yes	Romanian tax identification number (CUI) of the company to watch, e.g. '2816464'. Watching a company you already watch changes nothing.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	No	true when the watch is in place.
`asOf`	No	What to cite: registry (ONRC snapshot date), financialYear (fiscal year of the figures), anaf (day of the ANAF data), snapshot, published, source.
`error`	No	Set only when there is no answer (empty_query, invalid_cui, data_unavailable, plan_required ...); such a call is not counted.
`watch`	No	kind, target, owner (key prefix), county, baseline.
`message`	No	A sentence for the caller.
`attribution`	No	The credit line to keep when redistributing the data (CC BY 4.0).
`alreadyWatching`	No	true when you already held this watch (nothing changed).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 29, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / cui / description

Previous value: -"Romanian tax identification number (CUI) of the firm to watch, e.g. '2816464'. Watching a firm you already watch changes nothing."New value: +"Romanian tax identification number (CUI) of the company to watch, e.g. '2816464'. Watching a company you already watch changes nothing."

changedOutput schema / description

Previous value: -"The watch registered (or already held) for the firm."New value: +"The watch registered (or already held) for the company."

Changed1 schema field changedOct 17, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / attribution

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The credit line to keep when redistributing the data (CC BY 4.0).",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 17, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / cui / description

Added value: +"Romanian tax identification number (CUI) of the firm to watch, e.g. '2816464'. Watching a firm you already watch changes nothing."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "The watch registered (or already held) for the firm.",
+  "properties": {
+    "alreadyWatching": {
+      "description": "true when you already held this watch (nothing changed).",
+      "type": [
+        "boolean",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "asOf": {
+      "description": "What to cite: registry (ONRC snapshot date), financialYear (fiscal year of the figures), anaf (day of the ANAF data), snapshot, published, source.",
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "description": "Set only when there is no answer (empty_query, invalid_cui, data_unavailable, plan_required ...); such a call is not counted.",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "description": "A sentence for the caller.",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "true when the watch is in place.",
+      "type": [
+        "boolean",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "watch": {
+      "description": "kind, target, owner (key prefix), county, baseline.",
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 8, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already disclose that this is a non-destructive, idempotent write. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: it stores a baseline fingerprint, detects changes between monthly ONRC snapshots, and surfaces ANAF fiscal-inactivity and VAT-status flips. It does not mention any account, rate-limit, or watch-count constraints.

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?

Two tightly written sentences front-load the action and then explain the downstream effect. Every clause earns its place by clarifying what is stored, what polling reports, and which changes are detected.

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?

For a one-parameter write tool with an output schema and informative annotations, the description covers the essential mechanics: registration, baseline storage, polling behavior, and examples of detectable changes. Minor gaps remain around operational limits or prerequisites, but nothing critical to correct invocation is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the CUI parameter is already fully documented, including the idempotency note. The description references 'by CUI' but adds no syntax, format, or validation detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Register a company (by CUI) to monitor.' It clearly distinguishes this from poll_watchlist by explaining that polling reports changes, but it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling watch_caen, which also appears to register monitoring of a different kind.

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?

It gives a clear usage context: register a company to establish a baseline, then use poll_watchlist to see changes. It does not state when not to use this tool versus watch_caen or unwatch, but the workflow implication is strong.

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

All Leadgen ONRC Romania tools Inspect

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.