Skip to main content
Glama

Sirenic

by eu.sirenic

French company file (choose blocks)

get_french_company_file
Read-only

Full French company file in ONE call, paying only for the blocks you ask for — for when you need several things about the same company and do not want to chain calls. The identity base is $0.005; add any of etablissements, alertes_bodacc, finances, marches_publics, marches_publics_ue, lobbying, risques_industriels, agrements, pi, documents, facturation_prep, score. Each block costs exactly what its dedicated endpoint costs, and the total is capped at $0.35. Any block that cannot be served is NAMED with a reason from a closed list: aucune_donnee (a negative answer, e.g. no patents), non_diffusible (GDPR/partial disclosure) or panne_amont (upstream register down). If EVERY requested block is down, the call returns 503 and nothing is charged. For a verdict rather than raw blocks, use get_french_company_intelligence ($1.00). Paid via x402 in USDC or EURC.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
blocsYesComma-separated blocks, e.g. finances,pi,score. Available: etablissements, alertes_bodacc, finances, marches_publics, marches_publics_ue, lobbying, risques_industriels, agrements, pi, documents, facturation_prep, score
sirenYes9-digit SIREN, e.g. 552032534
api_keyNoOptional Sirenic API key (srn_live_…) to pay with prepaid credits instead of x402 — no wallet needed. Get one at https://api.sirenic.eu/compte. Ignored when x_payment is provided (the signed payment wins). On insufficient balance the tool returns a credits error, not an x402 quote.
x_paymentNoOptional signed x402 PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header value. Omit to receive the payment quote.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hintNoHow to settle the quote, present when payment_required is true.
quoteNoThe signable x402 payment requirements when payment_required is true: {x402Version, accepts[]} where each entry carries scheme, network, amount, asset and payTo (USDC and EURC options at the same numeric amount). Sign one entry and call again with `x_payment`.
resultatNoThe endpoint's JSON response when payment_required is false. Paid responses carry `source`, `disclaimer` and an Ed25519 signature; KYB, batch KYB, sanctions, intelligence and the five invoicing tools (prepare_french_invoice_file, prepare_european_invoice_file, prepare_french_einvoicing_recipient, verify_iban_bank, validate_eu_vat_number) also carry a `provenance` array — one entry per block served, with the official register, licence, version, `as_of` date and `precision_as_of` (what that date means). Codes are documented at GET /v1/provenance/registres (free).
payment_requiredYesTrue when this response is an x402 payment quote instead of data: settle one of the quote's `accepts` options and call the tool again with `x_payment`.

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses pricing mechanics ($0.005 base, per-block cost, $0.35 cap), failure semantics with a closed reason list (aucune_donnee, non_diffusible, panne_amont), and the 503/no-charge rule when every block is down. It also explains the payment modes x402 vs api_key credits and their precedence.

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 dense but front-loaded with the core value proposition, followed by pricing, failure behavior, and alternatives in a logical order. No sentence is filler; every clause adds operational information.

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?

For a multi-block, priced tool with an output schema, the description covers what an agent needs: when to call it, how blocks and payment interact, what failure reasons to expect, and the fallback tool for a different need. The existing readOnly annotation and output schema handle safety and return shape, so nothing essential is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Although the schema already describes each parameter, the description adds non-obvious semantics: blocs cost money individually and have a total cap, api_key interacts with x_payment in a defined precedence, and an insufficient balance yields a credits error rather than an x402 quote. This materially helps the agent select and format the parameters.

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 opens with 'Full French company file in ONE call' and specifies the exact resource, the selectable blocks, and the aggregation value. It distinguishes itself from get_french_company_intelligence by contrasting raw blocks with a verdict, making its purpose unmistakable among many French company siblings.

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?

It states the intended use case explicitly: 'when you need several things about the same company and do not want to chain calls.' It gives a direct alternative for a different need ('For a verdict rather than raw blocks, use get_french_company_intelligence') and implies the alternative of calling dedicated per-block endpoints by charging per block.

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

All Sirenic toolsInspect
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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several French company bundles overlap in purpose (get_french_company_file, get_french_company_kyb_file, get_french_company_intelligence, get_french_company_health_summary) and procurement/competitor tools overlap (get_french_company_public_procurement, get_eu_procurement_awards, get_company_procurement_competitors). Although descriptions try to differentiate, an agent could easily select the wrong tool when looking for a company overview or procurement history.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a consistent get_/list_/search_ + country + entity pattern, e.g. get_french_company_profile, list_danish_company_filings, so navigation is predictable. Deviations like check_french_regulator_alerts, suggest_company_names, verify_iban_bank, and the prepare_* verbs are understandable but break the strict verb_noun pattern.

Tool Count1/5

77 tools is excessive for a single server regardless of how broad the domain is; the calibration treats 50+ as an extreme mismatch. While France is well covered and several countries appear, much of the surface is micro-endpoints (list_/get_ filing pairs per country) that could be consolidated.

Completeness3/5

France coverage is impressively complete (identity, financials, legal events, procurement, IP, risk, surveillance, invoicing), and the surveillance lifecycle has create/get/renew/stop. But European coverage is inconsistent: Germany has only insider transactions, Spain only acts, and several major jurisdictions lack accounts/officers/insolvency; an agent expecting 'European company due diligence' will hit dead ends.

Resources