Look up a single 20-character Legal Entity Identifier from GLEIF open data to retrieve legal name, addresses, registration status, and parent entities.
Look up one 20-character Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) from any country in GLEIF open data. Returns legal name, addresses, registration status and parents.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lei | Yes | ||
| include_parents | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the data source (GLEIF open data) and the returned fields, which implies a safe read, but says nothing about authentication, rate limits, or behavior when the LEI is unknown.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two tight sentences with no filler. The lookup scope and source are front-loaded, and the return fields follow immediately.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so listing return fields is somewhat redundant, and neither parameter is meaningfully documented. For a two-parameter lookup tool the description is adequate but leaves the neighbor-selection question and parameter semantics unaddressed.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds a useful format constraint for the 'lei' parameter (20 characters) and implies 'include_parents' via the mention of parents, but never explains what the two parameters actually control or their defaults. Coverage of the boolean toggle is essentially absent.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description gives a specific verb (look up) and resource (a single 20-character LEI), plus the data source (GLEIF open data). The word 'one' implicitly differentiates it from the bulk_lookup sibling, though neither sibling is named explicitly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over lookup_company or bulk_lookup. The singular 'one' hints at single-record scope, but the agent is left to infer the boundary against the bulk and company alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.