insourcia

unwatch_company

DestructiveIdempotent

Retrait d'une societe de la surveillance : l'enleve d'une liste de veille de l'utilisateur (page /lists de l'app Insourcia). Inverse de watch_company.

Utiliser cet outil quand l'utilisateur veut ARRETER de suivre une societe ("je ne suis plus interesse par X", "enleve X de ma veille", "nettoie ma liste").

Fonctionnement :

Sans list_name, la societe est retiree de TOUTES les listes de l'utilisateur - c'est le sens naturel de "arrete de surveiller X". Avec list_name, seule cette liste est nettoyee.
Idempotent : si la societe n'est dans aucune liste (ou si la liste nommee n'existe pas), l'appel renvoie removed=false sans erreur.
La liste elle-meme n'est jamais supprimee, meme si elle devient vide. Une alerte active sur la liste reste active pour les autres societes.
Le retrait fonctionne meme pour une societe absente de l'index (radiee, disparue) : ce qui a pu etre ajoute peut toujours etre enleve.

Avant un retrait de masse ou en cas de doute sur le nom exact d'une liste, appeler list_watched_companies pour voir ou la societe est reellement surveillee.

Reponse : { siren, company_name (null si non renseignee), removed, removed_from: [{ list_id, list_name }], url (page /lists) }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`siren`	Yes	SIREN a 9 chiffres de la societe a retirer de la veille
`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."
`list_name`	No	Nom exact de la liste a nettoyer. Ex: "Surveillance", "Cibles M&A". Omis = retrait de toutes les listes de l'utilisateur.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes
`siren`	Yes
`removed`	Yes
`company_name`	Yes
`removed_from`	Yes

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses nuanced behavior: default removal from all lists, idempotent false-result behavior, list preservation even when emptied, alerts remaining active, and successful removal of companies absent from the index. This is substantial operational context that an agent could not infer from annotations or schema alone.

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 well-structured with a front-loaded purpose sentence, a usage trigger section, and bullet-pointed behavioral details. It is somewhat long and repeats the response shape that an output schema already provides, but every section earns its place by clarifying edge cases and side effects.

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?

The description covers the core operation, default vs. scoped behavior, idempotency, side effects on lists and alerts, edge cases around missing companies, and a fallback verification tool. Combined with the rich annotations and output schema, the agent has everything needed to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 has 100% parameter coverage and describes siren, context, and list_name including the omission default. The description reinforces list_name behavior but does not add meaning beyond the schema; it mostly restates the same semantics in prose.

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 precise verb and resource: 'Retrait d'une societe de la surveillance' and explains it removes a company from the user's watchlist. It also positions itself as the inverse of watch_company, making the tool's purpose unambiguous and clearly distinct from its sibling.

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 description explicitly states when to use the tool ('Utiliser cet outil quand l'utilisateur veut ARRETER de suivre une societe') and gives concrete user-phrase triggers. It also directs the agent to call list_watched_companies before mass removal or when a list name is uncertain, which is valuable routing guidance.

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?