Skip to main content
Glama

HelpMyAgent

by io.github.helpmyagent
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Explainable public default-risk indicator

company_fr_default_score

Returns a deterministic, explainable HelpMyAgent public-data default-risk indicator. It is not an official credit score. Use when: Returns a deterministic, explainable HelpMyAgent public-data default-risk indicator. It is not an official credit score. You need one deterministic, explainable public-data default-risk indicator for workflow triage. You want the component contributions and confidence rather than an opaque score. Avoid when: You only need insolvency, deregistration or legal-event risk; use company/fr/risk. You need an official credit rating, lending decision or regulated probability of default. Limitations: This is a HelpMyAgent indicator derived from available public data, not an official credit score. Missing source data reduces the evidence available to the indicator and is reflected in confidence/coverage fields. Price: 0.075 USD per call via x402. Paid-call behavior: source records are not modified, but a successful invocation can consume the advertised x402 payment; the payment-required challenge is free, and repeating the tool after a completed paid invocation may require a new payment. Accepted x402 networks: eip155:8453, xrpl:0.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
identifierYesFrench company identifier: 9-digit SIREN or 14-digit SIRET.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesPublicly available company, person, buyer or record name for this result.
levelYesStructured value returned for “level” as defined by this API contract.
scoreYesNormalized score produced by the endpoint; interpretation is defined by the tool description and limitations.
sirenYesNormalized 9-digit French SIREN when available.
existsYesWhether the requested company or public record was found in the checked source.
componentsYesStructured value returned for “components” as defined by this API contract.
confidenceYesConfidence indicator associated with an inferred or derived result.
identifierYesIdentifier supplied for the request, echoed in normalized form when applicable.
limitationsNoKnown interpretation, source-coverage or freshness limitations for this result.
identifier_typeYesNormalized identifier type, such as SIREN or SIRET when applicable.
known_weight_percentNoStructured value returned for “known weight percent” as defined by this API contract.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "identifier",
-  "identifier_type",
-  "exists",
-  "siren",
-  "name",
-  "score",
-  "level",
-  "confidence",
-  "components",
-  "limitations"
-]New value: +[
+  "identifier",
+  "identifier_type",
+  "exists",
+  "siren",
+  "name",
+  "score",
+  "level",
+  "confidence",
+  "components"
+]
  2. Changed14 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / description
      Added value: +"Structured input parameters for the company/fr/default-score API."
    • addedInput schema / properties / identifier / description
      Added value: +"French company identifier: 9-digit SIREN or 14-digit SIRET."
    • addedOutput schema / description
      Added value: +"Structured result returned by the company/fr/default-score API."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / components / description
      Added value: +"Structured value returned for “components” as defined by this API contract."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / confidence / description
      Added value: +"Confidence indicator associated with an inferred or derived result."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / exists / description
      Added value: +"Whether the requested company or public record was found in the checked source."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / identifier / description
      Added value: +"Identifier supplied for the request, echoed in normalized form when applicable."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / identifier_type / description
      Added value: +"Normalized identifier type, such as SIREN or SIRET when applicable."
    • changedOutput schema / properties / known_weight_percent
      Previous value: -[]New value: +{
+  "description": "Structured value returned for “known weight percent” as defined by this API contract."
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / level / description
      Added value: +"Structured value returned for “level” as defined by this API contract."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / limitations / description
      Added value: +"Known interpretation, source-coverage or freshness limitations for this result."
    • changedOutput schema / properties / name
      Previous value: -[]New value: +{
+  "description": "Publicly available company, person, buyer or record name for this result."
+}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / score
      Previous value: -[]New value: +{
+  "description": "Normalized score produced by the endpoint; interpretation is defined by the tool description and limitations."
+}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / siren
      Previous value: -[]New value: +{
+  "description": "Normalized 9-digit French SIREN when available."
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the sparse annotations by disclosing that the indicator is deterministic, not an official credit score, and that missing source data affects confidence/coverage. It also clearly explains paid-call behavior: payment may be consumed, the challenge is free, and repeating the tool may require a new payment. This is especially valuable because annotations do not indicate read-only or idempotent behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is structured with helpful labeled sections, but it contains a clear duplication: the opening sentence 'Returns a deterministic, explainable HelpMyAgent public-data default-risk indicator. It is not an official credit score.' is repeated almost verbatim inside the 'Use when' section. The pricing and network details are useful but could be tightened.

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 single-parameter paid tool with a rich output schema, the description covers use cases, exclusions, limitations, pricing, payment behavior, and accepted networks. Nothing essential for an agent to decide when and how to invoke this tool is missing.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage: it defines `identifier` as a French company identifier with a pattern and description of SIREN/SIRET. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 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?

The description states a specific verb ('Returns'), a clear resource ('public-data default-risk indicator'), and distinctive attributes ('deterministic, explainable', 'component contributions and confidence'). It explicitly differentiates from company_fr/risk by naming that tool as the alternative for insolvency/deregistration/legal-event risk.

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?

The 'Use when' section gives concrete scenarios such as 'workflow triage' and wanting 'component contributions and confidence rather than an opaque score'. The 'Avoid when' section explicitly lists the alternative tool (company/fr/risk) and excluded use cases like official credit ratings or regulated probability of default.

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

All HelpMyAgent 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