Skip to main content
Glama

Sirenic

by eu.sirenic
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Latvian company legal events

get_latvian_company_events
Read-only

Latvian company legal events from the official Uzņēmumu reģistrs open data (CC0, daily national photo): liquidations and activity terminations (incl. by court or tax authority), mergers, acquisitions, divisions and transformations with the other company's number, VID activity suspensions, and securing measures (prohibitions, liens, attachments) with the registering institution. Closed-list types plus source code and wording; a registered company with no event gets aucun_evenement: true.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
regnrYes11-digit Latvian registration number (Uzņēmumu reģistrs), e.g. 40003032065
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, and every paid JSON response carries a `provenance` array (all tools since 2026-09-06) — one entry per block served, with the official register, licence, version, `as_of` date and `precision_as_of` (what that date means), plus the common per-block envelope: `etat` in a closed list (servi, absence_mesuree, absence_non_conclusive, partiel, perime, indisponible, sans_objet), `motif` when unavailable, `age_jours` (only for publication or ingestion dates), `couverture` (complete / partielle / non_mesurable with its measure) and `confiance` in bands (faible / moyenne / forte, only where a measure grounds it, never averaged across blocks). Read the states before the numbers: an absence_non_conclusive, indisponible or partiel block is never « nothing to report » — only absence_mesuree asserts an absence. Register codes: GET /v1/provenance/registres ; states, closed lists and reading rules: GET /v1/lecture (both free). The PDF tools carry no JSON envelope (the PDF report prints it).
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`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the exact data source (official Uzņēmumu reģistrs, CC0, daily national photo), the controlled vocabulary ('closed-list types plus source code and wording'), and a specific no-event response flag ('aucun_evenement: true'). It does not discuss authentication or rate limits, but for a read-only open-data tool this is reasonably transparent.

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 a single dense sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then packs in source, scope, and a special-case behavior. There is no redundancy, but the long enumerations and semicolon-separated clauses make it somewhat harder to scan quickly.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the data source, update frequency, event taxonomy, and the no-event behavior, which is sufficient for a read-only legal-events tool. It could explicitly mention historical depth or pagination, but openWorldHint and the output schema soften that gap.

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 schema already documents the 11-digit regnr format and the api_key/x_payment semantics. The description adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond implying that the tool expects a registered Latvian company, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('get Latvian company legal events') and enumerates the distinct event types (liquidations, terminations, mergers, acquisitions, divisions, transformations, VID suspensions, securing measures), which clearly differentiates it from siblings like get_latvian_company_insolvency and get_latvian_company_officers. It also cites the official source, further anchoring the tool's purpose.

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?

Provides clear context about the covered event categories, so an agent can infer when to use this tool versus sibling tools for accounts, officers, or insolvency. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, leaving the contrast mostly implicit.

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
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