Handelsregister

List sectors & value lists (AT)

list_sectors

Read-onlyIdempotent

Beispiel: „Welcher Branchencode passt zu Brauereien?“

The value lists for filtering - legal forms, size classes - and, with a query word, the matching OENACE sectors with the exact nace_* filter to use. Read-only.

    Parameters:
    - query (optional): a category word (e.g. "Brauerei", "software"); returns ``matches``
      with each sector's level, code, label and the nace_* filter value for search_companies.
      Omitted: the legal-form and size-class value lists with counts.

    Served from the Austrian backend; the industry codes are OENACE == WZ == NACE Rev. 2,
    identical for both countries, so a resolved code also filters the German register. The
    value lists and counts themselves are Austrian (a notice says so). It returns no company
    data - call it once up front to resolve a filter value.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_sectors"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/closed-world, yet the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: data is served from the Austrian backend, OENACE == WZ == NACE Rev. 2 so codes resolve identically for Germany, and the value lists/counts themselves are Austrian-only. It also discloses the two distinct response modes and the 'call once' recommendation.

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?

Most sentences earn their place and the key constraint ('returns no company data', 'call once up front') lands near the end. However, the description opens with a German example quote rather than the core statement, and has inconsistent indentation with a redundant 'Parameters:' block that partially restates the schema.

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 no further explanation, yet the description still flags that the response key is 'matches' and what each entry carries. Cross-country code semantics, data provenance, and the two modes of operation are all covered - nothing an agent needs before calling 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the burden, and it does: query is described as a category word with concrete examples ('Brauerei', 'software'), the return shape for a match is enumerated (level, code, label, nace_* filter value), and the omitted case is explicitly defined as the legal-form/size-class value lists with counts.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The second sentence states a specific verb+resource: 'The value lists for filtering - legal forms, size classes - and, with a query word, the matching OENACE sectors with the exact nace_* filter to use.' It also implicitly distinguishes itself from the search siblings by framing the output as filter values consumed by search_companies. The leading German example sentence delays the actual statement of purpose, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 says 'call it once up front to resolve a filter value' and 'It returns no company data', which tells the agent when this tool is and isn't the right call. It implies the downstream consumer (search_companies) but doesn't name alternative lookup paths or say when not to call it, so it falls just short of the 5 bar.

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

All Handelsregister tools Inspect

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.