Versium REACH

Firmographic Append Mcp Tool

firmographic_append

Read-onlyIdempotent

Enrich business records with firmographics for account targeting and segmentation: company details, location, industry classifications, employee counts, and revenue data.

**Tips for Best Results:**
- Provide domain for fastest, most accurate results
- For business name searches, include complete address information or phone number
- Use `rcfg_require_value` to filter for specific industries or business characteristics

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`zip`	No	A 5 digit zip code
`city`	No	A city name
`email`	No	A valid business email address
`phone`	No	A valid 10 digit business phone number
`state`	No	A US state two letter abbreviation
`domain`	No	A business domain
`address`	No	An address (street address line 1)
`business`	No	A business name
`rcfg_max_time`	No	Maximum allowed API run time (in seconds)
`rcfg_require_value`	No	Field/value requirements in "Field=Value" format. Example: ["Industry=Technology"].

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`results`	No	Records returned by the Operations API. Record fields pass through unchanged.
`query_id`	No
`warnings`	No
`input_query`	No
`num_matches`	No	Number of matching queries.
`num_results`	No	Number of records returned.
`match_counts`	No	Sparse match counts. An absent key means zero.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedAug 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "input_query": {
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "match_counts": {
+      "description": "Sparse match counts. An absent key means zero.",
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "num_matches": {
+      "description": "Number of matching queries.",
+      "type": [
+        "integer",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "num_results": {
+      "description": "Number of records returned.",
+      "type": [
+        "integer",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "query_id": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "results": {
+      "description": "Records returned by the Operations API. Record fields pass through unchanged.",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": [
+        "array",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "warnings": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": [
+          "string",
+          "integer",
+          "number",
+          "boolean",
+          "object",
+          "array",
+          "null"
+        ]
+      },
+      "type": [
+        "array",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedAug 19, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description is not expected to restate those. The description adds context about typical use cases (account targeting/segmentation) and tips that imply behavior (e.g., domain yields fastest results). However, it does not disclose potential limitations, such as behavior with incomplete inputs or whether results may vary. The bar is lower due to annotations, but the description adds only modest behavioral context beyond them.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a clearly separated 'Tips for Best Results' section. Each sentence is purposeful and provides actionable guidance. The structure is easy to scan, and there is no redundant filler, though the tips could be seen as slightly verbose for some users.

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?

The tool has 10 optional parameters and an output schema exists. The description explains the overall function, provides strategic tips on parameter selection, and mentions filtering via rcfg_require_value. It does not elaborate on return formats (handled by output schema) or edge cases, but for a read-only enrichment tool with high schema coverage and annotations, the context is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 all parameters are described in the schema. The description adds value by linking certain parameters to usage tips: domain for speed, address/phone for business name searches, and rcfg_require_value for filtering. This goes beyond the schema's basic field descriptions and helps the agent understand parameter interactions, though it doesn't cover every combination.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: to enrich business records with firmographic data such as company details, location, industry, employee counts, and revenue. The verb 'enrich' and resource 'business records' are specific, and the listed fields distinguish it from other append tools. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like b2b2c_append, though the term 'firmographic' inherently signals the data type.

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 description provides actionable tips on how to get best results (e.g., provide domain for fastest results, include address/phone for business name searches, use rcfg_require_value for filtering). These are usage instructions but not guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like b2b2c_append or contact_append. There is no explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' statement, leaving selection to inference.

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

All Versium REACH 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?