Fresh Linkedin Profile Data MCP Server

Get Company Insights

get_company_insights

Fetch detailed LinkedIn company insights by company ID. Access key metrics and data points to support sales, recruiting, and market research.

Instructions

5 credits per call.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "company_id": "<company_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_company_insights"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`company_id`	Yes	Example value: 1035

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Sep 4, 2026

TDQS

D1.4/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations exist, and the description discloses no behavior: no output shape, no side effects, no assumptions, no access prerequisites. The cost note ('5 credits per call') is the only extra fact and it is not a behavioral disclosure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely short, but the one sentence it contains ('5 credits per call') does not explain the tool's purpose. This is under-specification rather than useful conciseness, yet it is at least not verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description needs to carry the contextual load, and it fails to do so. The agent cannot know what 'insights' are returned, what the company_id refers to beyond an identifier, or what calling this tool entails beyond credit cost.

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 baseline is 3 despite the description adding nothing about company_id. The schema itself only provides an example value, so there is some semantic weakness, but the description is not responsible for further compensation.

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

Purpose1/5

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

The description says only '5 credits per call' and never states what the tool does. The title 'Get Company Insights' is the only hint, but the tool definition itself offers no verb-resource statement. This is effectively missing, and no distinction from siblings is drawn.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus sibling tools like get_company_by_id or get_company_by_url, and no context for selecting it. The absence of any description leaves the agent without direction.

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

Deploy Server