Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Handelsregister

by io.github.jkbngb
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Find peer companies (incl. cross-border)

find_peers
Read-onlyIdempotent

Beispiel: „Welche Firmen sind ähnlich groß wie die Rauch Fruchtsäfte GmbH?“

Companies most similar to a given one - optionally ACROSS THE BORDER. Read-only.

    Parameters:
    - company_id (required): "AT:{fnr}" or "DE:{court}_{type}{number}" (bare national
      ids accepted), from a search card.
    - n (optional, default 10): how many peers per country.
    - cross_border (optional, default false): when true, additionally returns
      ``peers_abroad`` - the companies in the OTHER country whose registered purpose
      is semantically closest to the reference company's activity text.

    Returns {company_id, country, peers_home, home_envelope, peers_abroad?, notes}.
    ``peers_home`` uses the home register's own peer logic (AT: same size class,
    same industry preferred, nearest by Bilanzsumme; DE: semantic-first by registered
    purpose). ``peers_abroad`` is a MEANING-based match, not a size or financial
    benchmark - the honest cross-border comparison given the countries' different
    data depth (see notes). Empty peers_home means the id is unknown or the company
    lacks the data its register ranks by. For a strict filtered list use
    search_companies; for aggregates use the country server's cohort tools.

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": "find_peers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nNo
company_idYes
cross_borderNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, closed-world, non-destructive, so safety needs no restating. The description adds genuinely new context: that peers_abroad is a meaning-based match rather than a financial benchmark, and that an empty peers_home signals an unknown id or missing register data. Return-shape detail partially duplicates the output schema, keeping it just short of 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?

Front-loaded with purpose and example, then parameters, then return semantics and alternatives — a sensible order with little filler. The German-language example and the verbose return-shape sentence are minor indulgences, but both serve routing or invocation accuracy.

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?

For a 3-parameter read tool with an output schema, everything an agent needs is present: id formats, per-country peer logic differences, the semantic nature of cross-border matches, failure interpretation, and sibling alternatives. Nothing material is left to inference.

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 description coverage is 0% (bare titles like 'N', 'Company Id'), so the description carries the full burden and does: it specifies the exact company_id formats for AT and DE, notes bare national ids are accepted and that ids come from a search card, and defines n as peers per country and cross_border as an opt-in switch.

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 ('Companies most similar to a given one'), and immediately bounds the concept with a concrete example query. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by naming search_companies and the cohort tools, so an agent can route without opening a 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?

The opening example query shows the exact triggering intent, and the closing sentence gives explicit alternatives with conditions: search_companies for a strict filtered list, cohort tools for aggregates. That effectively encodes when-not-to-use as well as when-to-use.

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

All Handelsregister toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources