Skip to main content
Glama

Jithox

by com.jithox
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Look up a Peppol receiver

lookup_peppol_participant
Read-only

Ask live Peppol registers about e-invoice reception, document types and failure contacts; never guarantees delivery. Not a VAT or company-register check; use kbo_company_search (one company) or check_vat_list (a list). Free, no token.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
schemeNoThe four-digit Peppol scheme the number is registered under, when you know it: "0208" for a Belgian enterprise number (the mandatory primary scheme for Belgian businesses), "9925" for a Belgian VAT number, "0192" for a Norwegian organisation number.
identifierYesEnterprise/VAT number ("BE 0403.170.701" or "0403170701"), <scheme>:<id>, or iso6523-actorid-upis::<scheme>:<id>.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes
kindYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / identifier / description
      Previous value: -"The customer's enterprise or VAT number, as written on the invoice — \"BE 0403.170.701\", \"0403170701\" and \"BE0403170701\" are all accepted."New value: +"Enterprise/VAT number (\"BE 0403.170.701\" or \"0403170701\"), <scheme>:<id>, or iso6523-actorid-upis::<scheme>:<id>."
  2. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedInput schema / properties / identifier / maxLength
      Removed value: -60
    • removedInput schema / properties / identifier / minLength
      Removed value: -1
    • changedInput schema / properties / scheme / description
      Previous value: -"The four-digit Peppol scheme the number is registered under, when you know it: \"0208\" for a Belgian enterprise number (the mandatory primary scheme for Belgian businesses), \"9925\" for a Belgian VAT number, \"0192\" for a Norwegian organisation number. Left out, a Belgian enterprise number is assumed."New value: +"The four-digit Peppol scheme the number is registered under, when you know it: \"0208\" for a Belgian enterprise number (the mandatory primary scheme for Belgian businesses), \"9925\" for a Belgian VAT number, \"0192\" for a Norwegian organisation number."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "kind": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "kind",
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful non-structured context: it queries LIVE registers, it 'never guarantees delivery' (an important expectation-setting caveat), and it is free with no token/auth needed. Missing only depth on failure modes, but the coverage is strong.

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 dense sentences, front-loaded with purpose followed by the routing caveat. Every clause earns its place: reception/docs/contacts, the delivery caveat, and the sibling redirection.

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?

Output schema exists (so return format needn't be described), annotations cover the safety profile, and the description supplies the remaining essentials: what it queries, the reliability caveat, cost/auth, and how it differs from the two sibling checks. Nothing needed to call it 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%, so the schema already documents scheme codes and the accepted identifier formats in detail. The description adds no parameter-level syntax or format information beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 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?

Names a specific verb+resource (ask live Peppol registers about a receiver), states exactly what it returns (e-invoice reception, document types, failure contacts), and explicitly distinguishes itself from register-check siblings. An agent can identify it immediately without opening the schema.

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 says what it is NOT (a VAT or company-register check) and names the alternatives with their conditions: kbo_company_search for one company, check_vat_list for a list. The when-not/alternative guidance is fully spelled out.

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

All Jithox 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