Skip to main content
Glama

Sirenic

by eu.sirenic
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search French associations by name

search_french_associations
Read-only

Use FIRST whenever a French association (loi 1901, nonprofit, charity, club) is mentioned by NAME without an identifier. Searches the Répertoire national des associations (RNA) by trigram similarity on the title, with optional postal-code, department and position filters. Returns up to 20 matches with score_confiance (0-1) and the RNA number to pass to get_french_association_profile or get_french_association_notices; siren when Sirene confirms it. Associations with AND without a SIREN; the legacy file (no declaration since 2009) is flagged fichier_source: import. Paid via x402 ($0.002 in USDC or EURC).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesAssociation title, or an RNA number (resolved directly). Unsupported characters are stripped, not rejected.
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.
positionNoPosition filter; default all
x_paymentNoOptional signed x402 PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header value. Omit to receive the payment quote.
code_postalNoPostal code or prefix (2-5 digits) of the registered office
departementNoDepartment: 01-95, 2A, 2B or 971-989 (ignored when code_postal is given)

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

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With readOnlyHint and openWorldHint already present, the description adds valuable non-obvious behavior: fuzzy trigram matching, up to 20 matches, confidence score (0-1), SIREN included only when Sirene confirms it, legacy files flagged via fichier_source: import, and payment via x402 at $0.002. This significantly informs result interpretation and invocation expectations 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Every sentence earns its place: use-case, search behavior, output and downstream tools, SIREN/legacy handling, and cost. The opening (Use FIRST...) is immediately decision-relevant, and the overall structure is dense but not padded.

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 search tool with an output schema, the description covers the trigger, filtering options, result limit, scoring, downstream usage, and payment. Edge cases like missing SIREN and legacy filings are addressed, so an agent has what it needs to decide and invoke 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 the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning for the q parameter by noting 'trigram similarity on the title', which is not in the schema's description. It also summarizes the optional filters (postal-code, department, position) but does not add detail beyond the schema for those params.

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 clearly states 'Use FIRST whenever a French association (loi 1901, nonprofit, charity, club) is mentioned by NAME without an identifier' and goes on to specify the RNA registry, trigram similarity, and result contents. It also distinguishes itself from the get_french_association_profile/get_french_association_notices siblings by naming them as downstream consumers of the RNA number returned by this tool.

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 gives an explicit condition for when to use the tool ('mentioned by NAME without an identifier'), which implies the alternative when an identifier is available. It also names the downstream functions that accept the RNA number, providing a clear routing path for the agent.

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