Jithox

Look up an EU company

kbo_company_search

Read-only

VAT status / does this company exist: look up one EU VAT or enterprise number in EU VIES (Belgian KBO/BCE included). Returns registered name, VAT id, address and status; not proof of every company without VAT registration. 2 credits (EUR 0.02) per successful call; needs a bearer token.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`vatNumber`	Yes	EU VAT number, with or without its country prefix — e.g. "BE0123456789", "NL855876323B01", "DE811569869" or the bare Belgian enterprise number "0123456789".
`countryCode`	No	ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code of the issuing EU member state (uppercase), e.g. BE, NL, DE, FR.	BE

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes
`kind`	Yes
`billing`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedSep 25, 2026

removedInput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

changedInput schema / properties / countryCode / description

Previous value: -"ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code of the issuing EU member state (uppercase), e.g. BE, NL, DE, FR. Defaults to BE; inferred from the VAT prefix when present."New value: +"ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code of the issuing EU member state (uppercase), e.g. BE, NL, DE, FR."

removedInput schema / properties / countryCode / enum

Removed value: -[
-  "AT",
-  "BE",
-  "BG",
-  "HR",
-  "CY",
-  "CZ",
-  "DK",
-  "EE",
-  "FI",
-  "FR",
-  "DE",
-  "GR",
-  "HU",
-  "IE",
-  "IT",
-  "LV",
-  "LT",
-  "LU",
-  "MT",
-  "NL",
-  "PL",
-  "PT",
-  "RO",
-  "SK",
-  "SI",
-  "ES",
-  "SE",
-  "IS",
-  "LI",
-  "NO",
-  "GB",
-  "CH",
-  "US",
-  "CA",
-  "MX",
-  "BR",
-  "AU",
-  "NZ",
-  "JP",
-  "CN",
-  "IN",
-  "KR",
-  "SG",
-  "HK",
-  "AE",
-  "SA",
-  "ZA",
-  "TR",
-  "IL",
-  "UA",
-  "RS"
-]

removedInput schema / properties / vatNumber / minLength
```
Removed value: -1
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "billing": {
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "data": {
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "kind": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "kind",
+    "data",
+    "billing"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful operational context beyond that: a bearer token is required and each successful call costs 2 credits (EUR 0.02), plus the important limitation that absence from VIES is not proof of non-existence.

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?

Front-loaded with the core question the tool answers, then scope, then cost/auth constraints, with no filler sentences. It is dense but each clause carries distinct information; only the semicolon-packed cost/auth sentence is slightly compressed.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need only a summary and the description provides one (name, VAT id, address, status). Combined with the auth, cost, and coverage-limit disclosures, an agent has enough to invoke the tool correctly; only the sibling-routing gap keeps it from being fully complete.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema with examples and a default. The description reinforces that a bare Belgian enterprise number is acceptable but adds no format, prefix-handling, or country-interaction detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('look up one EU VAT or enterprise number in EU VIES') and names the concrete source including the Belgian KBO/BCE variant, so an agent knows exactly what is queried. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the closest sibling, check_vat_list, leaving the single-vs-list distinction to be inferred from 'one'.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The framing 'VAT status / does this company exist' implies the use case, and the caveat 'not proof of every company without VAT registration' bounds it. However, no alternative tool is named and no explicit when-not-to-use condition is given, so guidance remains implied rather than stated.

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

All Jithox 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.