Skip to main content
Glama

Imperio — Italian Tax & Compliance Tools

by com.imperioutils

NIS2: elenco ufficiale delle tipologie di soggetto

nis2_tipologie
Read-onlyIdempotent

Elenco ufficiale delle tipologie di soggetto degli allegati I–IV del D.Lgs. 4 settembre 2024 n. 138 (recepimento NIS2), verbatim dal testo di Gazzetta Ufficiale, con ricerca testuale. Serve a trovare il tipologia_id da passare a nis2_ambito. ⚠️ NON esiste alcuna mappa codice ATECO → tipologia, e questo strumento non ne usa una: la determinazione ACN sulla piattaforma digitale (art. 10 c. 2) tiene i codici ATECO e le tipologie di soggetto SEPARATI nella stessa dichiarazione, e l'ambito si determina sulla TIPOLOGIA, definita per rinvio a una norma UE. Dedurre l'ambito NIS2 da un codice ATECO significa applicare una regola che la fonte non contiene. Gratis (€0), deterministico, nessun login richiesto.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoRicerca testuale su testo della tipologia, settore e sottosettore (accenti e maiuscole ignorati; tutti i termini devono comparire). Es. 'cloud', 'energia elettrica', 'rifiuti'. Vuoto = tutto il catalogo.
limitNoNumero massimo di risultati (default 200).
allegatoNoFiltra per allegato. I = settori ad alta criticità (51 tipologie); II = altri settori critici (15); III = pubbliche amministrazioni (15); IV = ulteriori tipologie, che rientrano solo se individuate dall'ACN (4).

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds valuable behavioral details: free, deterministic, no login, search behavior (accent-insensitive, all terms must appear), and the critical caveat about no ATECO mapping. Adds meaningful context beyond annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is verbose, containing multiple warnings and explanatory sentences. While logical, it could be more concise by omitting redundant cautions. Front-loads purpose well.

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?

No output schema, but the description implies the response includes `tipologia_id`. However, it does not specify the result structure (e.g., list of objects with fields). Adequate but could be more explicit about return format.

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% with good descriptions. The description adds minor extra value: examples for `q`, default for `limit`, and counts per `allegato`. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it is the official list of subject types from NIS2 annexes, with search capability. It explicitly positions itself as the tool to obtain `tipologia_id` for use with `nis2_ambito`, distinguishing its role among siblings.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance (find tipologia_id for nis2_ambito) and a clear when-not-to-use warning (no ATECO mapping exists). Does not list alternatives but the context is sufficient.

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

All Imperio — Italian Tax & Compliance Tools 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are mostly distinct, targeting specific tax/compliance operations. The pair 'parse_fatturapa' and 'parse_verify_fatturapa' are similar but differentiated by the verification step. The detailed descriptions further reduce ambiguity.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with prefixes like 'calc_', 'validate_', 'lookup_', 'parse_', 'nis2_', etc. Minor deviations exist (e.g., 'compose_f24' vs 'calc_forfettario', 'intrastat_compose' vs 'intrastat_periodicity') but overall the pattern is clear.

Tool Count3/5

With 23 tools, the set is on the heavier side for a single server, covering many subdomains of Italian tax and compliance. While each tool seems purposeful, the count exceeds the typical well-scoped range (3-15), making it slightly overwhelming.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers a wide array of Italian tax and compliance needs: tax calculations, F24 composition, INTRASTAT, ATECO, NIS2, FatturaPA, and validations. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no IRPEF or IRAP calculators), but the core tax workflows are well supported.

Resources