insourcia

search_director_companies

Read-onlyIdempotent

Cartographie de l'empreinte corporate d'UNE personne physique : toutes les entreprises ou elle detient un mandat direct, identifiee de facon non ambigue par nom + prenom + date de naissance exacte.

C'est le pivot "personne -> entreprises", complement de search_directors (trouver la personne) et get_directors (dirigeants d'une entreprise). Cas d'usage M&A : tracer le perimetre de societes d'un fondateur/dirigeant (holdings, SCI, filiales) sans confondre les homonymes.

Parametres TOUS REQUIS : nom, prenom, date_naissance (format YYYY-MM-DD). La date de naissance est obligatoire : c'est elle qui distingue la bonne personne de ses homonymes. L'obtenir au prealable via search_directors ou get_directors (champ date_naissance).

Reponse : dirigeant { nom, prenom, date_naissance, annee_naissance } + data[] = entreprises { siren, denomination, role, ville, departement, code_ape, forme_juridique, est_tete_de_groupe } + pagination { total, returned, limit }. Resultat vide = aucun mandat direct trouve pour cette identite exacte (verifier la date_naissance).

Note : ne couvre que les mandats DIRECTS de la personne physique (exclut les dirigeants remontes depuis une PM representee, resolved_from_pm). C'est la difference de perimetre avec search_companies(dirigeant_nom/prenom/naissance), qui filtre plus large (inclut ces remontees, granularite mois) et retourne des entreprises, pas une empreinte centree personne. Pour la structure de detention capitalistique d'une entreprise, voir les champs groupe de get_company.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`nom`	Yes	Nom de famille du dirigeant (requis).
`limit`	No	Nombre d'entreprises a retourner (defaut 50, max 200).
`prenom`	Yes	Prenom du dirigeant (requis).
`context`	Yes	Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."
`date_naissance`	Yes	Date de naissance au format YYYY-MM-DD (requis, desambiguise les homonymes).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No
`message`	No
`dirigeant`	No
`_user_plan`	No
`pagination`	No

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already carry the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), lowering the bar. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context: coverage limited to direct mandates (excludes resolved_from_pm), and the disclosure that an empty result means no direct mandate exists for that exact identity, prompting the agent to verify date_naissance. No annotation contradiction.

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 long (~220 words) but front-loaded with the core purpose and organized into clear sections: purpose, tool-family positioning, required parameters, response shape, and scope note. Each paragraph earns its place; the homonym disambiguation point is restated a couple of times and could be tightened, but the structure remains highly scannable.

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 that an output schema exists (covering return values) and annotations cover the safety profile, the description covers everything else an agent needs: required parameters, how to obtain them, empty-result semantics, scope boundaries, and pointers to all three relevant sibling tools. Rate limits and auth requirements are the only omissions, which are minor for an idempotent, read-only search tool.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds value beyond it by flagging that all parameters are required, reinforcing the YYYY-MM-DD format, and providing the workflow to obtain date_naissance beforehand via search_directors or get_directors.

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: maps the corporate footprint of ONE physical person via all companies where they hold a direct mandate, disambiguated by exact date of birth. It also positions itself as the 'person -> entreprises' pivot and explicitly names sibling tools (search_directors, get_directors) it complements, so an agent can distinguish it without opening any schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance (M&A perimeter tracing for a founder/director across holdings, SCIs, subsidiaries) and explicit when-not-to-use guidance: search_companies for broader filtering that includes resolved_from_pm mandates with month granularity, and get_company for capitalistic holding structure. No ambiguity remains about tool selection.

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

All insourcia 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

A4.3/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct resource+action purposes, and the descriptions explicitly contrast near-neighbor tools like search_companies vs resolve_companies and get_events vs search_events. The only real risk is the trio of director-oriented tools, especially search_director_companies vs search_companies with dirigeant filters, which requires careful reading to avoid misselection.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 18 tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: search_, get_, list_, create_, watch_, unwatch_, mark_, resolve_. Singular names are used for single-entity actions and plural for list/search operations, making the pattern predictable. There is no camelCase, vague verb, or style mixing.

Tool Count4/5

18 tools is slightly above the ideal 10-15 range, but the count is justified by the broad domain covering search, company intelligence, watchlists, and news. Each tool appears to earn its place, and there are no obvious stubs or redundant duplicates. It feels a bit heavy but not bloated.

Completeness3/5

The company intelligence surface is very complete: search, deep company data, financials, directors, group graphs, events, and credit risk are all covered. Watchlists also have full add/remove/list coverage, but saved searches have a notable lifecycle gap—create and list exist, yet there is no update, delete, or alert-toggle for existing saved searches, creating a management dead end.

Resources

Need Help?