Skip to main content
Glama

Sirenic

by eu.sirenic
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Romanian annual accounts (Ministry of Finance)

get_romanian_company_accounts
Read-only

Romanian company annual accounts from the Ministry of Finance open data (data.gov.ro, CC BY 4.0, financial years 2019-2024, every published year in one call): balance sheet (fixed and current assets, inventories, receivables, cash, liabilities, provisions, equity, paid-up capital), income statement (net turnover, total income and expenses, gross and net profit or loss), average headcount, CAEN Rev. 2 activity class and filing format (abridged or full). Amounts in RON as published, null = not published, never zero. Legal persons only; a company with no published statement answers 404 without charge (banks, insurers, NBFIs and NGOs file in separate, unserved files).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cuiYesRomanian CUI / fiscal code, 1 to 10 digits, with or without the RO prefix, e.g. 412052 or RO412052
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

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, it discloses the data source and license, that amounts are in RON, that null means not published and never zero, that the API responds 404 without charge for absent statements, and that separate filing types are unserved. This gives the agent concrete behavioral expectations well beyond the annotations.

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 dense and front-loaded with the essential purpose, followed by useful scope and failure semantics. It is a single long sentence that could be broken up for readability, but every clause adds substantive information and there is no filler.

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 read-only data-retrieval tool with an output schema, the description covers the source, years, covered entities, returned fields, formatting, null semantics, and the no-result 404 behavior. Nothing needed to decide whether to call the tool and interpret its result is missing.

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%, with all three parameters (cui, api_key, x_payment) already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema; the baseline of 3 applies because the schema carries the parameter documentation burden.

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 'Romanian company annual accounts from the Ministry of Finance open data', naming the exact resource and scope, then enumerates the specific balance-sheet and income-statement fields returned. This makes it immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like get_romanian_company_insolvency or get_uk_company_accounts.

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?

The description gives clear applicability context: financial years 2019-2024, all published years in one call, legal persons only, and a 404 rather than an empty result for companies without a statement. It does not name an alternative tool explicitly, but it states exclusions (banks, insurers, NBFIs, NGOs) that tell the agent when not to expect results.

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