Genesis402

Look up a company (GLEIF, SEC)

genesis402_company_lookup

Look up a company worldwide in official registers GLEIF and US SEC EDGAR by LEI, name, or CIK to retrieve legal status, addresses, parent entities, tickers, and filings.

Instructions

Paid ($0.01 USDC). Look up one company worldwide in the official registers: GLEIF (Legal Entity Identifiers, every country) and US SEC EDGAR. By LEI: legal name, status, jurisdiction, addresses, registration authority, renewal dates and its registered direct and ultimate parent. By name: ranked matches, live registrations first, with legal forms understood across languages and names in their own script. By SEC CIK: filer profile, tickers and latest filings. Registry data only: not KYC, not a compliance determination, not legal advice. Payment: call once without payment_signature to get the exact price quote (nothing is charged or signed), then call again with the signed payment to receive the result and settlement details.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	Company name (3 to 200 characters), 20-character LEI, or SEC CIK.
`payment_signature`	No	Optional. An x402 v2 payment you signed for this call's quote (the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header value). Omit to get the price quote first; nothing is charged without it.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mode`	Yes	QUOTE_ONLY: price quote only, nothing signed or charged. PAID: the call was paid and result holds the data. FREE: the endpoint answered without payment.
`paid`	Yes	true only when a payment was settled for this call.
`price`	No	The Base USDC quote. Present on QUOTE_ONLY and on PAID calls made by a local payer; null when the rail offered no Base USDC lane or the caller signed the payment.
`result`	No	PAID or FREE: the endpoint's JSON result.
`resource`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: the full URL of the paid resource.
`how_to_pay`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: how to sign and resend the call.
`settlement`	No	PAID: decoded PAYMENT-RESPONSE settlement (transaction hash, network, payer), or null if the rail sent none.
`what_you_get`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: the rail's description of what the payment buys.
`payment_required_b64`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: the raw base64 PAYMENT-REQUIRED header, to sign with any x402 v2 client.
`also_accepted_networks`	No	QUOTE_ONLY: every network the 402 challenge accepts.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.3.6Oct 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Discloses the two-step paid workflow precisely: call once without payment_signature to receive a quote (nothing charged or signed), then call again with the signed payment to get results and settlement details, plus the $0.01 USDC cost. This is behavioral context the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true) do not convey. No contradiction: the description frames it as a lookup, consistent with a paid read that isn't strictly read-only due to payment.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, price, and registries before detail; every sentence carries information (inputs, outputs, exclusions, payment flow). It is dense but a touch long, with the final payment sentence repeating the 'nothing is charged' idea already implied.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed. Given the payment complexity and multi-registry scope, the description covers inputs, scope limits, cost, and the two-call payment protocol, leaving nothing material for an agent to infer.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning by mapping each accepted query form to its return content (LEI to parents/addresses, name to ranked live registrations, CIK to filer profile and filings) and by explaining the quote-then-pay semantics of payment_signature.

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 (look up one company) and enumerates the exact registries queried (GLEIF, SEC EDGAR), plus the three supported key types. This distinguishes it clearly from siblings like genesis402_sec_financials or genesis402_counterparty_report.

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?

Gives clear context on which input key yields which output shape (LEI vs name vs CIK) and an explicit scope exclusion: 'Registry data only: not KYC, not a compliance determination, not legal advice.' It does not, however, name when to prefer a sibling tool such as genesis402_sanctions_name_screen for compliance screening, so guidance stops short of explicit alternatives.

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