Skip to main content
Glama

Prh Fi

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search Companies

search_companies
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the Finnish business register (PRH / YTJ) by company name and/or filters. Results under {totalResults, companies:[...]}. Each company has businessId (Y-tunnus), names[], mainBusinessLine, companyForms[], addresses[], status. e.g. {name:"Nokia"} or {name:"Oy", location:"Helsinki", companyForm:"17"}. Use businessId here for an exact single-company lookup, or call get_company.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoCompany name search, e.g. "Nokia".
pageNo1-based page number (default 1).
locationNoRegistered municipality/city, e.g. "Helsinki".
businessIdNoExact Finnish Y-tunnus, format NNNNNNN-N, e.g. "0112038-9".
companyFormNoCompany form code, e.g. "17" (public limited company / Oyj), "16" (limited company / Oy).
mainBusinessLineNoMain business line code (TOL/NACE), e.g. "70100" (head office activities).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "name": "Nokia"
+  },
+  {
+    "companyForm": "16",
+    "location": "Helsinki",
+    "name": "Oy"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent. Description adds result structure and pagination (page param). No contradictions.

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?

Concise and well-structured: 5 sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with purpose, then result format, then examples.

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?

Covers result shape, example usage, and sibling reference. Missing details like AND vs OR for multiple filters, but adequate for a search tool with good schema.

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 covers all 6 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds examples but little new semantics beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states it searches the Finnish business register by name/filters. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling 'get_company' for exact businessId lookup.

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?

Provides when to use businessId here vs. get_company. Gives examples with filters. Does not compare to other siblings but is adequate for intended use.

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

All Prh Fi 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