Skip to main content
Glama

Handelsregister

by io.github.jkbngb

Company profile (AT + DE)

get_company_details
Read-onlyIdempotent

Full profile for ONE company, routed by its unified id. Read-only.

    Parameters:
    - company_id (required): "AT:{fnr}" (e.g. "AT:123456a") or
      "DE:{court}_{type}{number}" (e.g. "DE:D2601_HRB135076"); bare national ids are
      accepted too. Take it from a search card's ``company_id``.
    - max_signatories (optional, DE only): cap on the served officer list (DE default
      15, 0 = all); ignored for AT.

    Returns the country backend's full profile plus ``country`` and the prefixed
    ``company_id``. AT: identity, location, per-year Bilanz + GuV, ratios, growth,
    filings, management, events. DE: identity, seat, Stammkapital, Gegenstand, WZ/NACE
    classification, managing directors (birth year only) - German financial statements
    are not covered yet, so never report them as zero or missing. Unknown id ->
    {error: not_found}. Use search_companies first when you only have a name.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
company_idYes
max_signatoriesNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare the operation read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, and the description reinforces this. It additionally discloses important runtime behaviors: unknown ids produce {error: not_found}, DE financial statements must not be reported as zero/missing, and max_signatories behavior differs by country.

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?

The description is dense but each sentence contributes necessary operational knowledge. Purpose is front-loaded, parameter details are organized, and country-specific differences are separated clearly, making the long text easy to navigate.

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?

Given that an output schema exists, the description covers everything an agent needs to select and invoke the tool correctly: input derivation, path routing, parameter semantics, per-country return content, known data gaps, and error behavior. Nothing essential is missing.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully documents both parameters. It gives exact formats and examples for company_id, explains how to obtain it, and precisely defines max_signatories defaults, valid values, country restrictions, and ignored cases for AT.

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: returns the full profile for exactly ONE company, routed by its unified company_id. It also differentiates itself from siblings by explicitly pointing to search_companies for the case where only a name is known, making the tool's role unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit direction: use search_companies first when only a name is available, and take company_id from a search card. It also details country-specific behavior and warns that German financial statements are not covered, giving an agent clear guidance on when this tool is and is not appropriate.

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
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Each tool has a distinct primary purpose, with clear pointers to the right tool for the job. The main possible confusion is between describe_fields/get_coverage and search_companies/search_person, but the descriptions actively disambiguate those boundaries.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent lowercase snake_case verb_noun pattern: describe_fields, export_companies_csv, get_company_details, list_events, search_companies. Even ping fits the predictable style as a simple liveness verb.

Tool Count5/5

Eleven tools is well-scoped for a unified company-register facade. Each tool covers a distinct part of the surface: schema, coverage, search, detail, persons, peers, events, statistics, export, and diagnostics.

Completeness5/5

The read-only domain is covered thoroughly: lookup, detail, person search, similarity, event feeds, aggregate stats, and export all exist. Unsupported country-specific features are handled with notices and coverage metadata rather than missing tooling.

Resources