Leadgen MCP

Company profile with website contacts

enrich_company

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a complete Romanian company profile from a CUI: ONRC registry data plus website contacts with confidence and source labels, all in one call.

Instructions

A whole-firm profile in one call: the ONRC registry record plus the contacts discovered on that firm's website, each labelled with a confidence and a source. Prefer this over lookup_business followed by extract_contacts when you want everything about one company. cui is its tax code; website overrides the registered one; max_pages bounds the crawl; refresh=true crawls now instead of answering from the cache.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cui`	Yes	Romanian tax identification number (CUI), e.g. '2816464'; 'RO' and leading zeros are accepted.
`refresh`	No	true crawls now even if a cached result exists (default false: answer from the cache when there is one).
`website`	No	Optional website override (domain or URL). When omitted, the firm's registered website is used (an error if none is on file).
`max_pages`	No	Maximum number of pages to crawl (1-20, default 5).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cui`	No	The firm's CUI.
`asOf`	No	What to cite: registry (ONRC snapshot date), financialYear (fiscal year of the figures), anaf (day of the ANAF data), snapshot, published, source.
`error`	No	Set only when there is no answer (empty_query, invalid_cui, data_unavailable, plan_required ...); such a call is not counted.
`company`	No	A company record: companyName, cui, registrationCode, registrationDate (DD/MM/YYYY), legalForm, euid, address, county, city, website, phone, caenActivities [{code, activity (RO), activityEn}], directors, representatives [{name, role}], status [{code, name}], latestFinancials {year, revenue, netResult, employees; RON}, anaf {mainCaen, vatPayer, eFactura, inactive}, risk {level, label, reasons, isLead}, source, asOf, url (the firm's public record page to share with the user; null for sole traders and other natural persons), and score/match on name searches. With fields or compact, only the requested keys (compact keeps url).
`crawled`	No	true when the site was crawled for this answer.
`message`	No	A sentence for the caller.
`website`	No	The website crawled.
`cacheHit`	No	true when answered from the cache.
`contacts`	No	Contacts found, each with type, value, confidence and source.
`crawlError`	No	Why the crawl failed, if it did.
`pagesCrawled`	No	Pages read.
`websiteSource`	No	Where the website came from: registry or override.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.3Oct 19, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / company / description

Previous value: -"A company record: companyName, cui, registrationCode, registrationDate (DD/MM/YYYY), legalForm, euid, address, county, city, website, phone, caenActivities [{code, activity}], directors, status [{code, name}], latestFinancials {year, revenue, netResult, employees; RON}, anaf {mainCaen, vatPayer, eFactura, inactive}, risk {level, label, reasons, isLead}, source, asOf, and score/match on name searches. With fields or compact, only the requested keys."New value: +"A company record: companyName, cui, registrationCode, registrationDate (DD/MM/YYYY), legalForm, euid, address, county, city, website, phone, caenActivities [{code, activity (RO), activityEn}], directors, representatives [{name, role}], status [{code, name}], latestFinancials {year, revenue, netResult, employees; RON}, anaf {mainCaen, vatPayer, eFactura, inactive}, risk {level, label, reasons, isLead}, source, asOf, url (the firm's public record page to share with the user; null for sole traders and other natural persons), and score/match on name searches. With fields or compact, only the requested keys (compact keeps url)."

First observedv0.1.0Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, and the description goes further by disclosing cache-vs-live behavior ('refresh=true crawls now instead of answering from the cache') and that outputs carry confidence and source labels. It stops short of covering crawl cost, latency, or failure/partial-result behavior, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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?

Front-loads the value proposition and the sibling routing rule, then compresses all four parameters into one dense clause each. No sentence is redundant or padded.

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 explained; the description still notes the confidence/source annotation on discovered contacts. With schema and annotations covering the rest, an agent has everything needed to call this 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented with types, defaults and constraints (1-20 pages, RO-prefix acceptance). The description restates 'cui is its tax code', the website override, the crawl bound and refresh semantics without adding syntax or examples beyond the schema.

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 composite verb/resource ('whole-firm profile in one call: the ONRC registry record plus the contacts discovered on that firm's website') and explicitly names the two siblings it replaces. An agent can distinguish it from lookup_business and extract_contacts without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use rule and names the alternatives: 'Prefer this over lookup_business followed by extract_contacts when you want everything about one company.' Both the condition and the competing tools are stated, leaving nothing to inference.

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

Deploy Server