Plumbline: OFAC SDN sanctions screening, SEC financials and company checks from public registries

Identify a company (LEI and SEC filer)

identify_company

Read-onlyIdempotent

Which legal entities a company name may mean: GLEIF LEI records that match it (legal name, country, city, status) and, for a company listed in the US, its SEC filer CIK. For choosing the exact entity to verify before ordering; these are candidates, not findings. Free.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "identify_company"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes
`country`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description still adds real value beyond them: it discloses that results are candidate entities rather than verified findings, enumerates the fields returned, and states the call is free — a cost trait the annotations do not carry.

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 core statement is front-loaded and the trailing clauses ('candidates, not findings', 'Free') are short and load-bearing. The colon-led opening fragment is slightly telegraphic and takes a beat to parse, but there is no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

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 well to enumerate the returned fields and the cost. However, it leaves open how the optional country parameter filters results, what happens on ambiguous or zero matches, and whether results are truncated — relevant for a disambiguation tool that may return many candidates.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it largely does not. The 'country' parameter (maxLength 2) is never explained — it appears only as a returned field, leaving it ambiguous whether it is an ISO-3166 filter or a display field — and no matching behavior for 'name' (exact vs fuzzy) is given.

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 names the exact operation and its output: GLEIF LEI records matching a company name (legal name, country, city, status) plus the SEC filer CIK for US-listed companies. The phrase 'these are candidates, not findings' separates it from downstream verification/screening siblings such as verify_suppliers or screen_sanctions.

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 use context: 'For choosing the exact entity to verify before ordering', which positions it as a pre-verification disambiguation step. It also sets an explicit expectation ('candidates, not findings'), though it never names a sibling tool or states when not to use it.

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

All Plumbline: OFAC SDN sanctions screening, SEC financials and company checks from public registries 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.

Resources

Need Help?