mcp.xynaptic

company-profile

Xynaptic Company Profile — consolidated identity from the French state registry: SIREN, legal form, NAF, headcount, HQ, VAT, creation, status. Parameter: ?siren=. [price: $0.020 per call, x402/USDC]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	No	query parameters

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 2, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / body

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "JSON body for POST endpoints (e.g. insurance, ai-chat, production-risk)",
-  "type": "object"
-}

changedInput schema / properties / params / description

Previous value: -"query parameters, e.g. {city: 'Paris', type: 'Appartement'}"New value: +"query parameters"

addedInput schema / properties / params / properties

Added value: +{
+  "naf": {
+    "description": "example: \"70.10Z\"",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "name": {
+    "description": "example: \"DANONE\"",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "siren": {
+    "description": "example: \"552032534\"",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "status": {
+    "description": "example: \"active\"",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+}

addedInput schema / required
```
Added value: +[]
```

First observedOct 1, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it does add genuinely useful behavior: the data provenance (French state registry) and the paid access model (price per call, x402/USDC). It does not state read-only nature explicitly, rate limits, or error/not-found behavior, so gaps remain.

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?

A single dense sentence front-loads the tool's identity and data source, followed by the parameter and price. No filler, though the field enumeration is slightly list-heavy.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned identity fields, which is what an agent needs to judge fit. The main missing element is sibling routing/comparison and any note on whether multiple query params (name, naf, status) can be combined or are ignored.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the nested params (naf, name, siren, status) are already documented with examples. The description highlights siren as the primary key, which adds mild emphasis, but contributes no syntax, format, or matching semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names the resource (company profile), the authoritative source (French state registry), and enumerates the returned identity fields (SIREN, legal form, NAF, headcount, HQ, VAT, creation, status). It is distinguishable from company-search or company-kyb by being a consolidated registry-identity lookup, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No statement of when to use this tool versus the many company-* siblings (company-search, company-financial, company-kyb, company-international-profile). The only usage hint is the '?siren=' parameter mention, which is a calling detail, not routing guidance.

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

All mcp.xynaptic tools Inspect

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

Need Help?