cemis-directorio

Buscar empresas

buscar_empresas

Read-onlyIdempotent

Busca empresas del directorio CEMIS combinando filtros con AND. Todos son opcionales.

- sector: uno de los valores devueltos por listar_sectores(), o un sector de la
  taxonomía de matching de reformas (ver impacto_de_reforma()) que todavía no
  tiene ninguna empresa asignada — en ese caso el resultado es una lista vacía
  con una nota explicativa, no un error.
- provincia: una de las 16 provincias cubanas (ver listar_provincias()).
- objetivo: coincidencia parcial contra 'que_busca' de la empresa (ej. 'inversión',
  'socio estratégico', 'distribuidor', 'exportar').
- verificada: True para empresas con datos de contacto verificados, False para no
  verificadas, None (default) para no filtrar.
- limite: máximo de resultados a devolver (default 50); el total real de matches
  siempre se informa en 'total_encontrado' aunque exceda el límite.

Devuelve una ficha resumida por empresa, no el perfil completo (usá ficha_empresa()
para eso).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limite`	No
`sector`	No
`objetivo`	No
`provincia`	No
`verificada`	No

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/not-destructive annotations, the description discloses meaningful behavior: the unusual empty-list-with-explanatory-note case for sectors with no assigned companies, the default and maximum limit behavior, the total_encontrado field, and the summary-card output. No contradiction with 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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and uses a compact bulleted list for the five parameters. Every sentence adds necessary detail; there is no filler or repetition of schema defaults beyond useful behavioral context like the default limit.

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?

Given five optional combinable filters, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions in the schema, the description is complete enough to guide invocation: it covers filter sources, edge-case returns, limits, and output granularity. It also names ficha_empresa() for the full profile, closing the main follow-up question.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description fully carries parameter meaning. It explains each parameter's source domain, matching semantics (e.g. 'coincidencia parcial'), edge cases, defaults, and the special None behavior for verificada. This is exemplary compensation for the absent schema descriptions.

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 opens with 'Busca empresas del directorio CEMIS combinando filtros con AND', giving a specific verb, resource, and combination semantics. It also distinguishes itself from ficha_empresa() by explicitly stating it returns a summary card, not the full profile, so an agent can tell tools apart.

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 gives clear context: all filters are optional, combined with AND, and valid values for sector/provincia come from listar_sectores() and listar_provincias(). It explicitly directs full-profile needs to ficha_empresa(), though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling search tools like empresas_por_oportunidad.

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

All cemis-directorio 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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct query path: general company search, full company profile, opportunity-to-company lookup, sector-to-opportunity lookup, reform impact, and list helpers. Even the related entity lookups are clearly separated by input and output.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are readable and consistently lowercase with underscores, but they mix verb-first conventions (buscar_empresas, listar_sectores) with noun-first descriptive names (ficha_empresa, impacto_de_reforma, empresas_por_oportunidad). The pattern is understandable but not uniform.

Tool Count5/5

Seven tools is well within the ideal range and each tool covers a necessary query path for the CEMIS directory domain. There is no obvious bloat or thinness in the tool surface.

Completeness4/5

The core workflows are well covered: company search, company detail, sector/province enumeration, sector-opportunity relationships, opportunity-company relationships, and reform impact. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct way to list all reforms or all opportunities, but these can be worked around through the existing sector and reform lookup tools.

Resources

Need Help?