Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Storno CLI

Storno CLI

Official
by stornoro
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

companies_create

Add a company via CIF for automatic ANAF name, address, and VAT lookup, or register an individual with a validated CNP, full name, city, and county.

Instructions

Add a company or an individual person to the organization. Company: give the CIF (with or without RO); ANAF supplies name, address and VAT status. Individual person (persoană fizică, the landlord who files D212 / C168 as a person): type "individual" with the CNP, full name, city and county (address optional); nothing is fetched from ANAF and the CNP is checked (13 digits, control digit). Never invent a CNP.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cifNoRomanian tax identification number / CIF (e.g., "12345678" or "RO12345678") — companies only
cnpNoThe person's CNP (13 digits) — individuals only
cityNoCity / localitate — individuals only (required)
nameNoFull name — individuals only
typeNo"individual" for an individual person identified by CNP (default company)
emailNo
phoneNo
stateNoCounty / județ — individuals only (required)
addressNoStreet and number — individuals only
countryNoISO country, default RO

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.38
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / description
      Previous value: -"\"individual\" for a natural person identified by CNP (default company)"New value: +"\"individual\" for an individual person identified by CNP (default company)"
  2. Changed11 schema fields changedv1.0.37
    • addedInput schema / properties / address
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Street and number — individuals only",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / cif / description
      Previous value: -"Romanian tax identification number / CIF (e.g., \"12345678\" or \"RO12345678\")"New value: +"Romanian tax identification number / CIF (e.g., \"12345678\" or \"RO12345678\") — companies only"
    • addedInput schema / properties / city
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "City / localitate — individuals only (required)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / cnp
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The person's CNP (13 digits) — individuals only",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / country
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ISO country, default RO",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / email
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / name
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Full name — individuals only",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / phone
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / state
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "County / județ — individuals only (required)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / type
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "\"individual\" for a natural person identified by CNP (default company)",
+  "enum": [
+    "company",
+    "individual"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "cif"
-]
  3. First observedv1.0.17

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false), and the description adds substantive behavior beyond them: ANAF enrichment supplies name/address/VAT for companies, nothing is fetched for individuals, and the CNP is validated with a 13-digit control-digit check plus a "Never invent a CNP" guardrail. It omits what happens on duplicate CIF/CNP or what the call returns, which keeps it off a 5.

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?

Dense but well partitioned: the company path, the individual path, and the validation warning each get their own clause. Slightly overloaded as a single paragraph, and the Romanian domain terms add reading cost, but every sentence carries information.

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?

For a 10-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the description covers both modes, required inputs, external lookups, validation rules and a safety caveat. Missing only return-value expectations and duplicate-handling behavior, which are minor relative to what is present.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 80%, but the schema declares zero required parameters, so the description is what actually tells the agent that city and county are required for individuals, address is optional, and cif/cnp are mode-exclusive. That is genuine semantic value the structured fields do not provide.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ("Add a company or an individual person to the organization") and immediately splits the tool into its two distinct operating modes. An agent can distinguish this from companies_get / companies_update / clients_create without opening the schema.

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 states which data to supply under each mode (CIF for companies, type="individual" + CNP/name/city/county for persons) and what each mode does internally. It stops short of naming alternatives such as companies_update for existing records or clients_create for customers, so it lacks true when-not/alternative routing.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools