Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Fuentio: UK, France & Spain company data from official registries

by com.fuentio
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Insolvency notices and state of a company

check_insolvency
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check a company's insolvency notices and state: France from BODACC (safeguard, reorganisation, liquidation, plans, closures), Spain from BORME insolvency acts. Use it for credit or supplier checks. Don't use it for sanctions: call screen_company. Inputs: country and identifier, as lookup_company (e.g. 'FR', '441639465'). Returns: state (in_procedure, under_plan, closed, notice_found, none_found, not_covered), procedure, dates, notices with official citations, covered_since. Limits: 1 unit. No notice outside the loaded years is not proof of no procedure. Read-only.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countryYesISO country code: FR or ES or GB.
identifierYesOfficial ID, as lookup_company: FR SIREN (9 digits), SIRET or VAT; ES Registro Mercantil sheet, e.g. VI-23266. GB: Companies House company number, e.g. 00445790.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes
metaYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / country / description
      Previous value: -"ISO country code: FR or ES."New value: +"ISO country code: FR or ES or GB."
    • changedInput schema / properties / country / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "FR",
-  "ES"
-]New value: +[
+  "FR",
+  "ES",
+  "GB"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / identifier / description
      Previous value: -"Official ID, as lookup_company: FR SIREN (9 digits), SIRET or VAT; ES Registro Mercantil sheet, e.g. VI-23266."New value: +"Official ID, as lookup_company: FR SIREN (9 digits), SIRET or VAT; ES Registro Mercantil sheet, e.g. VI-23266. GB: Companies House company number, e.g. 00445790."
    • changedInput schema / properties / identifier / examples
      Previous value: -[
-  "441639465",
-  "VI-23266"
-]New value: +[
+  "441639465",
+  "VI-23266",
+  "00445790"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, but the description adds value they don't carry: a cost/rate constraint ('Limits: 1 unit') and a critical coverage caveat ('No notice outside the loaded years is not proof of no procedure') plus the covered_since field. Return states and citations are also disclosed, though some of that overlaps the output schema.

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?

Labeled sections (use/don't use/Inputs/Returns/Limits) make it scannable and the routing guidance is front-loaded. Slightly long because the Returns enumeration partly restates the output schema, but nearly every sentence carries information.

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 an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values, yet it still covers usage, exclusions, cost limits, and the honest coverage-window caveat. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly 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 description coverage is 100%, with enum and per-country identifier formats already documented, so baseline is 3. The description adds only a light cross-reference ('as lookup_company') and one example pair, which is marginal beyond what the schema provides.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Check a company's insolvency notices and state') and enumerates the exact coverage sources (BODACC for France, BORME insolvency acts for Spain) and procedure types, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings like lookup_company or verify_company without opening schemas.

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?

Explicitly gives the intended use case ('credit or supplier checks') and a hard exclusion with the correct alternative ('Don't use it for sanctions: call screen_company'), plus a pointer to lookup_company for identifier conventions. This is the full when/when-not/alternative pattern.

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

All Fuentio: UK, France & Spain company data from official registries 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