Skip to main content
Glama

HelpMyAgent

by io.github.helpmyagent
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

French E-Invoice Preparation

company_fr_e_invoice

Prepares public company identifiers and a category-based reference schedule for French e-invoicing workflows. Use when: Prepare public identity fields for a French electronic-invoicing workflow. You need public company identifiers and a category-based reference schedule for a French e-invoicing workflow. You want headquarters SIRET, VAT number and indicative receiving/issuing obligation dates together. Avoid when: You are checking identifiers already printed on a supplier invoice; use company/fr/invoice-check. You only need the company’s current public profile; use company/fr/profile. Limitations: The schedule is derived from public company-category information and the implemented reference rules. It does not confirm enrollment with a specific invoicing platform or guarantee operational readiness. Price: 0.020 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.
sirenYesNormalized 9-digit French SIREN when available.
existsYesWhether the requested company or public record was found in the checked source.
identifierYesIdentifier supplied for the request, echoed in normalized form when applicable.
vat_numberYesStructured value returned for “vat number” as defined by this API contract.
limitationsNoKnown interpretation, source-coverage or freshness limitations for this result.
prepared_atYesStructured value returned for “prepared at” as defined by this API contract.
company_categoryYesStructured value returned for “company category” as defined by this API contract.
headquarters_siretYesStructured value returned for “headquarters siret” as defined by this API contract.
establishment_scopeYesStructured value returned for “establishment scope” as defined by this API contract.
headquarters_addressYesStructured value returned for “headquarters address” as defined by this API contract.
issuing_obligation_fromYesStructured value returned for “issuing obligation from” as defined by this API contract.
receiving_obligation_fromYesStructured value returned for “receiving obligation from” 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",
-  "exists",
-  "siren",
-  "name",
-  "company_category",
-  "vat_number",
-  "headquarters_siret",
-  "headquarters_address",
-  "receiving_obligation_from",
-  "issuing_obligation_from",
-  "establishment_scope",
-  "prepared_at",
-  "limitations"
-]New value: +[
+  "identifier",
+  "exists",
+  "siren",
+  "name",
+  "company_category",
+  "vat_number",
+  "headquarters_siret",
+  "headquarters_address",
+  "receiving_obligation_from",
+  "issuing_obligation_from",
+  "establishment_scope",
+  "prepared_at"
+]
  2. Changed16 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / description
      Added value: +"Structured input parameters for the company/fr/e-invoice 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/e-invoice API."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / company_category / description
      Added value: +"Structured value returned for “company category” as defined by this API contract."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / establishment_scope / description
      Added value: +"Structured value returned for “establishment scope” as defined by this API contract."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / exists / description
      Added value: +"Whether the requested company or public record was found in the checked source."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / headquarters_address / description
      Added value: +"Structured value returned for “headquarters address” as defined by this API contract."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / headquarters_siret / description
      Added value: +"Structured value returned for “headquarters siret” as defined by this API contract."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / identifier / description
      Added value: +"Identifier supplied for the request, echoed in normalized form when applicable."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / issuing_obligation_from / description
      Added value: +"Structured value returned for “issuing obligation from” as defined by this API contract."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / limitations / description
      Added value: +"Known interpretation, source-coverage or freshness limitations for this result."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / name / description
      Added value: +"Publicly available company, person, buyer or record name for this result."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / prepared_at / description
      Added value: +"Structured value returned for “prepared at” as defined by this API contract."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / receiving_obligation_from / description
      Added value: +"Structured value returned for “receiving obligation from” as defined by this API contract."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / siren / description
      Added value: +"Normalized 9-digit French SIREN when available."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / vat_number / description
      Added value: +"Structured value returned for “vat number” as defined by this API contract."
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Despite annotations all being false, the description discloses critical behavioral traits: it is a paid call (price), it can consume payment, it does not modify source records, it does not confirm enrollment or operational readiness, and it specifies accepted x402 networks. This goes well beyond what annotations provide and sets clear expectations about side effects and limitations.

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?

The description is structured with clear labels (Use when, Avoid when, Limitations, Price, etc.) and front-loads the core purpose. It is somewhat long due to payment details, but every section adds essential operational information for a paid tool. It is efficient for the information it conveys.

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?

With one well-documented parameter, an output schema present, and a description covering purpose, usage boundaries, limitations, payment behavior, and network acceptance, nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly is missing. The description is self-sufficient.

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 documents the single parameter 'identifier' with its pattern and description (SIREN/SIRET). The tool description adds no new meaning to the parameter itself, only hints at what outputs derive from it. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline 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 opens with a specific verb 'Prepares' and a clear resource: 'public company identifiers and a category-based reference schedule' for French e-invoicing. It then explicitly differentiates from siblings (invoice-check, profile) via 'Use when' and 'Avoid when', making it unambiguous what this tool does and what it does not.

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 specifies the exact conditions (need public identifiers, schedule, HQ SIRET, VAT, dates) and the 'Avoid when' section names two concrete alternatives (invoice-check for printed invoices, profile for current public data). This leaves no ambiguity about when to select this tool over others.

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