Skip to main content
Glama

Check sanctions and KNF warnings

check_risk_flags
Read-onlyIdempotent

Compliance red-flag check for a Polish company (legal entity) by NIP. USE THIS for KYC/AML or before onboarding a counterparty: returns whether the company appears on Polish or EU sanctions lists (as the sanctioned subject) and whether it has a public warning from the KNF (Polish Financial Supervision Authority). A KNF warning is a notice filed with the prosecutor, not a conviction: apply the presumption of innocence. Legal entities only (sole traders are out of scope). Exact match on NIP/KRS/REGON. Read-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nipYesPolish tax ID (NIP), 10 digits

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint. Description adds important context about KNF warnings (presumption of innocence) and entity scope, enhancing transparency beyond annotations.

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?

Single, well-front-loaded paragraph with no redundancy. Every sentence adds value (purpose, usage, special behavior).

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 purpose, usage, scope, and a key behavioral caveat. Lacks explicit return format, but for a simple boolean check tool with one parameter, this is sufficient; no output schema exists to compensate.

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 has 100% coverage with description and pattern for nip. Description mentions NIP but adds no further semantic value beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the tool performs compliance red-flag checks for Polish legal entities by NIP, returning sanctions and KNF warnings. Distinguishes from siblings like check_vat_whitelist and get_company by focusing on AML/KYC.

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?

Explicitly recommends usage for KYC/AML before onboarding, specifies scope (legal entities only) and match type (NIP/KRS/REGON). Does not mention alternatives but context is clear.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool serves a distinct purpose: VAT verification, company profile, financials, and name search. No overlaps.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow consistent verb_noun pattern: check_vat_whitelist, get_company, get_financials, search_company.

Tool Count5/5

4 tools is appropriate for a focused domain of Polish company data; neither too few nor too many.

Completeness4/5

Covers core operations for accessing Polish company info but lacks some advanced features like detailed financial breakdowns or historical data.