agentdata-nl

check_dutch_insolvency

Dutch bankruptcy and insolvency check against the official Central Insolvency Register of the Dutch judiciary (rechtspraak.nl). Detects published bankruptcy (faillissement), suspension of payments (surseance) and debt restructuring procedures. Best results with a KVK number. Returns procedure type, status, dates, court and a source reference per match, with explicit match-basis and coverage notes. A no_match means no publication in the currently searchable register. Companies only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`city`	No
`name`	Yes	Company name
`kvk_number`	No	8-digit KVK number (strongly recommended; exact match)

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses return fields (procedure type, status, dates, court, source reference), match-basis, coverage notes, and clarifies that 'no_match' means no publication in the searchable register. With no annotations, this adds significant behavioral context.

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?

Three sentences front-loaded with purpose and efficient detail. No unnecessary words, and every sentence earns its place. Structure is clean and scannable.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description covers return values, match semantics, and scope (companies only). It lacks details on pagination or edge cases, but given the straightforward nature of a lookup tool, it is reasonably complete.

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 67%, and the description adds value by noting that kvk_number is 'strongly recommended' and an 'exact match,' and that 'Best results with a KVK number.' It does not elaborate on city or name beyond the schema, but the added context improves parameter understanding.

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 the tool checks Dutch bankruptcy/insolvency against the official Central Insolvency Register, listing specific procedures (faillissement, surseance, debt restructuring) and specifying 'Companies only.' It distinguishes from sibling tools that check other countries or companies.

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 advises 'Best results with a KVK number' and restricts to companies, providing clear context for use. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives, but the scope is well-defined among sibling country-specific checks.

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

All agentdata-nl tools Inspect

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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct action and domain: country-specific company checks (check_ch_company, check_fr_company, etc.), insolvency checks, crypto signals, x402 network tools, etc. Descriptions are detailed and make boundaries clear, with no two tools appearing to do the same thing.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow very consistent patterns: 'check_<country>_<entity>' for registers, 'crypto_*' for crypto intelligence, 'x402_*' for x402 network functions, 'screen_*' for screening, and a few free-form names like 'verify_eu_vat' and 'lookup_lei' that still fit the verb_noun style. No mixing of conventions.

Tool Count4/5

39 tools is high but justified by the broad scope: the server aggregates many country-specific checks, insolvency registers, crypto tools, x402 monitoring, and auxiliary functions (like phone number buying, LEI lookup). Each tool serves a clear purpose, and the count is not excessive given the coverage. A slight reduction could be possible by merging some country checks, but overall it's reasonable.

Completeness4/5

The server covers major European company registers (CH, UK, FR, NL, NO, PL, CZ, FI), insolvency checks (NL, FR), sanctions screening, VAT validation, crypto market intelligence, and x402 network tools. It acknowledges gaps (e.g., no German check) and provides fallback tools like 'screen_eu_supplier' and 'file_agent_want'. Minor missing pieces (e.g., Italian company check) keep it from a perfect 5.

Resources

Need Help?