CompanyLens

Browse Companies

browse_companies

Read-onlyIdempotent

Browse companies in a jurisdiction by structured filters — incorporation date range, status, and entity type — without requiring a name query. Use this to enumerate all UK PLCs incorporated since 2020, or all dissolved Norwegian companies. Unlike search_companies, jurisdiction is required (cross-jurisdiction browsing times out). Returns cursor-paginated results — check hasMore and pass nextCursor to retrieve subsequent pages. Results do not include matchScore or matchRank (no name query to score against). relevanceScore (0–1) reflects company prominence: combines company age and entity type.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`sort`	No	Sort order: 'relevance' (default — prominence signal combining age and entity type), 'name' (alphabetical)
`limit`	No	Results per page (default 10, max 20)
`cursor`	No	Opaque cursor from a previous response's nextCursor field (omit for first page)
`status`	No	Filter by company status (e.g. 'active', 'dissolved')
`entityType`	No	Filter by entity type (e.g. 'private_limited', 'public_limited', 'limited_liability_partnership', 'branch')
`jurisdiction`	Yes	Jurisdiction slug (e.g. 'uk', 'ireland') or ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code (e.g. 'ie', 'no', 'nz'). Required — cross-jurisdiction browsing is not supported.
`incorporatedAfter`	No	Filter to companies incorporated on or after this date (inclusive). ISO 8601 format: YYYY-MM-DD.
`incorporatedBefore`	No	Filter to companies incorporated on or before this date (inclusive). ISO 8601 format: YYYY-MM-DD.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 10, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / industryCodes

Removed value: -{
-  "default": null,
-  "description": "Filter by SIC/NACE industry codes — OR semantics, returns companies matching any supplied code. Pass one or more codes e.g. ['69201'] or ['69201','69202']. If you are unsure of the code for a sector, call list_industry_codes first.",
-  "items": {
-    "type": [
-      "string",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "type": [
-    "array",
-    "null"
-  ]
-}

removedInput schema / properties / maxOfficerCount

Removed value: -{
-  "default": null,
-  "description": "Maximum active officer count (inclusive). Filters to companies with at most this many current officers. For example, to find companies with fewer than 10 directors, pass maxOfficerCount=9.",
-  "type": [
-    "integer",
-    "null"
-  ]
-}

removedInput schema / properties / minOfficerCount

Removed value: -{
-  "default": null,
-  "description": "Minimum active officer count (inclusive). Filters to companies with at least this many current officers.",
-  "type": [
-    "integer",
-    "null"
-  ]
-}

changedInput schema / properties / sort / description

Previous value: -"Sort order: 'relevance' (default — prominence signal combining officer count, filings, age, and entity type), 'name' (alphabetical), 'officercount' (most officers first)"New value: +"Sort order: 'relevance' (default — prominence signal combining age and entity type), 'name' (alphabetical)"

First observedMay 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No behavioral annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses pagination behavior (hasMore, nextCursor), the absence of matchScore/matchRank, the meaning of relevanceScore, and the cross-jurisdiction timeout constraint. It doesn't explicitly state read-only status or rate limits, but the provided details are substantial.

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?

Four dense sentences, front-loaded with the primary use case and filter types, then contrast with sibling tool. Every sentence adds information; no fluff.

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 browse/list tool with 6 params but simple flat schema, description explains purpose, filters, pagination, scoring differences. No output schema but enough to 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 covers parameters 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds cross-jurisdiction exclusion and clarifies pagination semantics and score definition beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('browse') tied to a clear resource: enumerating companies in a single jurisdiction by structured filters, with concrete examples (e.g., all dissolved Norwegian companies). It explicitly contrasts with search_companies, distinguishing itself from the closest sibling without relying on the schema.

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?

States exactly when to use this tool ('enumerate all UK PLCs'), and explicitly names search_companies plus the jurisdiction requirement as the key differentiator. The negative constraint (cross-jurisdiction browsing times out) prevents misuse.

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

All CompanyLens 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?