Company Intelligence Tools — Zinin M2M Hub

Taiwan Company KYB Lookup

taiwan-company-kyb-lookup

Resolve Taiwan companies (統一編號 or legal name) to an evidence-backed KYB card from the official MOEA GCIS open-data registry. Free structural checks, free not-found/ambiguous/error outcomes; billed only for a complete, unambiguous company card. — $0.01/call, x402 (USDC on base).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`companies`	Yes	One to 100 companies. Give either unifiedBusinessNumber or legalNameZhTw for each entry, never both.
`includeBoard`	No	Whether to also fetch the company's board of directors/supervisors and shareholding from the registry. This is personal-data-bearing: names and shareholding of living people. Turn off to request only the company card. Default: true.
`maxConcurrency`	No	Companies processed concurrently only in local non-monetized runs. On-platform source work and paid delivery are sequential regardless of this value, and every request to the registry is paced conservatively either way.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds valuable behavioral details beyond the sparse annotations: 'Free structural checks, free not-found/ambiguous/error outcomes; billed only for a complete, unambiguous company card' clarifies the billing/failure model. It also names the official source. However, it does not describe the output structure or side effects beyond cost.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by billing/free-outcome details. No fluff.

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?

The description covers input types, source, and billing but omits the structure of the returned KYB card. Since there is no output schema, the agent is left without knowing what fields to expect, which is a notable gap for a lookup tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description mentions '統一編號 or legal name' but the schema already has detailed parameter descriptions. No additional semantics are provided beyond what the schema states.

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 uses a specific verb ('Resolve'), clearly identifies the resource ('Taiwan companies'), and specifies the output ('evidence-backed KYB card'). It distinguishes itself from generic sibling tools like company-lookup by being Taiwan-specific and focused on KYB.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or conditions. The Taiwan/KYB scope is implied by the name but not contrasted with generic company lookup tools.

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

All Company Intelligence Tools — Zinin M2M Hub tools Inspect

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

A4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but some overlap exists between company-lookup and company-registry-enricher, and between individual signal tools and composite rollups. The descriptive names help differentiate, but the boundary between one-off screenings and alert/rollup tools requires careful reading.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a consistent pattern of hyphenated lowercase nouns (e.g., company-lookup, funding-alert, sanctions-screening). The one exception, pricing_info, uses an underscore, creating a minor deviation from the otherwise uniform naming style.

Tool Count4/5

With 20 tools, the server is on the higher end of typical scope but justified for a comprehensive company intelligence bundle. Each tool covers a distinct or complementary aspect of company research, so the count feels purposeful rather than bloated.

Completeness5/5

The toolset covers company lookup, registry, hiring, funding, sanctions, litigation, patents, contacts, new company detection, and email verification—a broad and well-rounded surface for due diligence and sales intelligence. Composite tools like intent-signal-aggregator and lead-list-qualifier tie these together effectively, leaving no major dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?