Skip to main content
Glama

Handelsregister

by io.github.jkbngb

Search a person across registers

search_person
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find every company a person runs or represents - across BOTH registers in one call (cross-border person search). Read-only.

    Parameters:
    - name (required): person name substring, case-insensitive, e.g. "Mustermann".
    - country (optional, default "all"): "AT" | "DE" | "all".
    - page_size (optional, default 25): results per country.
    - status (optional, default "all"): "active" | "inactive" | "all".

    Returns the merged search_companies envelope ({countries, results, per_country,
    notices}) plus ``person_query``; every result card carries ``country``,
    ``company_id`` and the matched manager. AT matches the primary managing director,
    DE matches all managing directors AND registered signatories. IMPORTANT: matching
    is by name and the registers publish birth YEAR only - a shared name across
    companies or countries does not prove the same person (the notice says so; use
    birth years and context to corroborate). For general company search use
    search_companies with other filters; manager_name can be combined there too.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
statusNoall
countryNoall
page_sizeNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description discloses return-envelope shape, per-country matching semantics (AT matches only the primary managing director; DE matches all MDs and signatories), and the critical caveat that name-based matching with only birth-year published does not prove a single person across companies/countries. This contextual warning directly prevents agents from drawing false conclusions.

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?

The core purpose is front-loaded and the parameter block is organized, with every sentence earning its place. Minor deducts: it repeats defaults already present in the schema as data, and the phrase '(the notice says so)' is a slightly noisy aside in an otherwise lean definition.

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?

The definition is complete for a 4-parameter search tool: it covers required input, output envelope and per-card fields, per-country behavioral differences, the identity-matching hazard, and sibling-tool routing. With an output schema present, nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly 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 carries the full burden of param semantics. It covers every one of the 4 parameters with defaults, allowed values (AT/DE/all; active/inactive/all), format (substring, case-insensitive, e.g. 'Mustermann'), and behavior implications (page_size = results per country). It exceeds what the bare JSON schema provides.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Find every company a person runs or represents - across BOTH registers in one call (cross-border person search)'. It names the sibling it is not ('For general company search use search_companies'), so an agent can distinguish it from search_companies 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 Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly routes to an alternative: 'For general company search use search_companies with other filters; manager_name can be combined there too.' It also clarifies when this tool applies (person-centric cross-register search) and sets expectations with the AT vs DE matching differences, leaving no ambiguity about tool selection.

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