Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Sentinelle créances FR

by io.github.Marcoco27
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

creances_lookup

France insolvency claim deadlines. For 1 to 50 French companies (SIREN): insolvency proceedings published in the BODACC (safeguard, receivership, liquidation), and for each opening judgment the exact last day for a creditor to file a claim (2 months after publication, 4 if abroad; art. R622-24 Code de commerce), days left, appointed liquidator and the notice link. For credit managers, accountants, debt collectors. Price: 0.01 USDC per call (x402).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "sirens": "<sirens>"
    },
    "name": "creances_lookup"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sirensYes
residenceNometropole

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses a hard batch cap (1-50 SIRENs), the commercial cost model (0.01 USDC per call via x402), and the legal basis for the computed deadline (art. R622-24, 2 months / 4 months abroad). It does not cover failure behavior for unknown SIRENs or whether billing applies to failed calls.

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?

Front-loaded with the domain, then the scope, then the returned fields, then audience and price. Nearly every clause adds information; the audience sentence is the weakest element but still aids selection. Dense but readable.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must cover everything. It does describe the returned fields at a useful level, but leaves the residence parameter's accepted values and the sirens list encoding unspecified, which are exactly the details an agent needs to construct a valid call.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains sirens reasonably (French company identifiers, batched 1-50) but never specifies the string format (separator, padding), and the residence parameter is only indirectly hinted at through '4 [months] if abroad' with no enumeration of 'metropole' vs. other values despite its default.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a precise resource (French insolvency claim deadlines from BODACC proceedings) and enumerates the returned facts: opening judgment, exact claim filing deadline, days remaining, liquidator, notice link. It never mentions the sibling creances_example, so an agent gets no explicit differentiation from it, which keeps this at 4 rather than 5.

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?

Usage context is concrete: 1 to 50 French companies identified by SIREN, and the target audience (credit managers, accountants, debt collectors) is stated, which implies the scenario. There are no exclusions and no pointer to when creances_example should be used instead, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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

All Sentinelle créances FR 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