Skip to main content
Glama

Crypto, web, finance and app data tools

Company LEI Lookup

lei_lookup

Look up legal entities in the global LEI register (GLEIF) by company name or 20-character LEI: exact legal name, status, legal form, jurisdiction, registration number, address and LEI renewal date. Use for KYC, counterparty checks and company identification.

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": {
      "q": "<q>"
    },
    "name": "lei_lookup"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYes
limitNo
countryNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It makes clear that this is a read-only lookup against GLEIF and specifies accepted identifier types, but it does not disclose rate limits, ranking behavior for name searches, pagination behavior, or error handling.

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?

The description is two efficient sentences with no repetition. Purpose and accepted identifiers are front-loaded, followed by concrete use cases.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values. Still, for a three-parameter lookup tool with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, it omits key semantic details for country and limit and does not fully frame alternatives.

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 explain all three parameters. It usefully explains that q accepts a company name or a 20-character LEI, but it never mentions the limit or country parameters, leaving two of three parameters undocumented.

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 states a specific verb and resource: look up legal entities in the global LEI register (GLEIF). It also distinguishes the tool by naming the authoritative source and accepted identifiers, so an agent can tell this apart from generic company-search siblings.

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?

It gives clear use cases (KYC, counterparty checks, company identification), which implies when to use it. However, it does not name alternatives such as sanctions_name_screen or us_company_search, nor does it say when not to use LEI lookup.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources