ENTIA Entity Verification

Professional Lookup

professional_lookup

Read-onlyIdempotent

PAID (requires ENTERPRISE plan, custom contract). Use when the user asks whether a Spanish health or legal professional is registered (colegiado number, college, specialty). Verify professional registrations across 24 Spanish health/legal/psychology verticals. Returns colegiado number, college, specialty, status.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	Professional name, colegiado number, or REPS identifier
`vertical`	No	Healthcare/legal vertical (dental, medicos, psicologia, ...)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`_meta`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedAug 30, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / vertical

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Healthcare/legal vertical (dental, medicos, psicologia, ...)",
+  "maxLength": 40,
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedAug 18, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "Professional registration verification across Spanish health, legal and psychology registries. Enterprise DPA required.",
+  "properties": {
+    "_meta": {
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed3 schema fields changedMay 26, 2026

removedInput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

changedInput schema / properties / query / description

Previous value: -"Professional name, colegiado number, or REPS identifier. Covers healthcare professionals (REPS), abogados (CGAE), psicólogos (COP), médicos, enfermería, dentistas, fisioterapeutas, logopedas, dietistas, podólogos, ópticos, veterinarios, terapeutas ocupacionales (17 CCAA)."New value: +"Professional name, colegiado number, or REPS identifier"

AddedMay 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the commercially critical fact that this is a paid call requiring an ENTERPRISE contract, which is real value beyond structured fields. It says nothing about not-found behavior or failure modes.

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?

Three tight sentences with the cost constraint front-loaded before the usage trigger. The final sentence restating return fields is mildly redundant given the output schema exists, but it is short enough not to waste space.

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?

Cost gate, trigger condition, vertical coverage, and returned fields are all covered, and the output schema handles the return shape. Missing only edge-case behavior such as no-match results or invalid professional-type handling.

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%, so both query and vertical are already documented, and the description adds no syntax, format, or enumeration detail (e.g., accepted vertical values) beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (verify professional registrations) plus scope (24 Spanish health/legal/psychology verticals) and the exact question it answers. This clearly separates it from neighbors like entity_lookup, verify_vat, and get_identity_verification.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger: 'Use when the user asks whether a Spanish health or legal professional is registered.' The paid-plan gate further narrows when it is viable. It does not name alternatives or say when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All ENTIA Entity Verification 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.