Stablecoin Gateways

LEI Lookup (GLEIF)

lei_lookup

Read-onlyIdempotent

LEI lookup (GLEIF): find a company's Legal Entity Identifier by legal name, or get the full record by LEI: legal name, jurisdiction, entity and registration status, registered and headquarters address, and direct and ultimate parent companies. Use for KYB, company identity verification, counterparty identification and corporate ownership checks. Global coverage, CC0 data. Signed receipt. Price: $0.002 per call via x402 (USDC on Base or XRP on XRPL). The response includes a provenance block (sg-provenance/1): each fact carries its source, source URL, retrieval time and limits; evidence only, no score, rating or verdict. Example arguments: {"lei":"HWUPKR0MPOU8FGXBT394"}.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "lei_lookup"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lei`	No	20-character LEI (give lei or name)
`name`	No	Legal name search

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No	GLEIF LEI record(s): legal name, jurisdiction, status, addresses, direct and ultimate parents
`receipt`	No	Ed25519-signed, hash-chained receipt; verify free with the verify_receipt tool or POST /v1/verify-receipt. New receipts carry a signed `evidence` object: service_version, data_timestamp, validation, terms_version, terms_hash, provenance_hash.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 24, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / provenance

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The response includes a `provenance` block (sg-provenance/1): each fact carries its source, source URL, retrieval time and limits; evidence only, no score, rating or verdict."
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / receipt / description

Previous value: -"Ed25519-signed, hash-chained receipt; verify free with the verify_receipt tool or POST /v1/verify-receipt"New value: +"Ed25519-signed, hash-chained receipt; verify free with the verify_receipt tool or POST /v1/verify-receipt. New receipts carry a signed `evidence` object: service_version, data_timestamp, validation, terms_version, terms_hash, provenance_hash."

Changed1 schema field changedOct 22, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "Paid result: { data, receipt }. Unpaid calls return an x402 PaymentRequired object instead (isError: true).",
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "GLEIF LEI record(s): legal name, jurisdiction, status, addresses, direct and ultimate parents",
+      "properties": {
+        "direct_parent": {},
+        "found": {},
+        "record": {},
+        "retrieved_at": {},
+        "source": {},
+        "ultimate_parent": {}
+      }
+    },
+    "receipt": {
+      "description": "Ed25519-signed, hash-chained receipt; verify free with the verify_receipt tool or POST /v1/verify-receipt"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, it discloses cost and payment mechanics ($0.002 per call via x402, USDC on Base or XRP on XRPL), that a signed receipt is returned, CC0/global coverage, and that the provenance block is evidence only with no score or verdict. Those are exactly the operational facts an agent needs before calling.

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 lookup purpose before the use cases, pricing, and provenance notes; every clause carries information. It is dense and runs long as a single block, but nothing reads as filler.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be spelled out, and the description still explains the provenance block's meaning, which matters for interpretation. The only real gap is behavior when both lei and name are passed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds that the two parameters are alternatives ('by legal name, or ... by LEI') and supplies a concrete example argument with a real 20-character LEI. It does not state precedence if both are supplied, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 ('find a company's Legal Entity Identifier by legal name, or get the full record by LEI') and enumerates the returned data fields. It is clearly distinguishable from identity-verification siblings like sanctions_screen or counterparty_check.

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?

Explicit use cases are given: KYB, company identity verification, counterparty identification, and corporate ownership checks. It gives clear context for when to reach for this tool but does not exclude cases or name an alternative sibling (e.g., counterparty_check) whose overlap an agent would want resolved.

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

All Stablecoin Gateways 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.

Resources

Need Help?