Skip to main content
Glama

regdata_germany_insolvency

Search Germany's official insolvency register by company or debtor name. Retrieve court, case number, publication date, seat, and Handelsregister reference, with clear reporting when a broad term matches too many announcements.

Instructions

Germany Insolvency Register Search (Insolvenzbekanntmachungen). Search Germany's official insolvency register (Insolvenzbekanntmachungen) by company or debtor name. Get court, case number, publication date, seat and the Handelsregister reference. When a term matches too many announcements the register declines to enumerate them - that "too many matches" state is reported as such and is NOT "no insolvencies"; narrow the query and re-run. No API key. Advanced fields beyond this schema are also accepted (regdata_describe lists them).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNoOptional city to narrow the search (matches the debtor's registered seat or place of residence).
nameNoThe debtor to look up: a company name (e.g. "Wirecard") or a person's surname. Matched as a contains-search across the official insolvency register. Leave empty when using a watchlist.
stateNoOptional filter by German state - narrows the search and helps a broad term stay under the register's 1,000-match cap. Use a name ("Bayern", "Nordrhein-Westfalen") or a code ("BY", "NW").NO_CODE
dateToNoEnd of the publication-date window (YYYY-MM-DD). Defaults to today.
subjectNoOptional filter by the type of decision within the proceeding.NO_CODE
dateFromNoStart of the publication-date window (YYYY-MM-DD). Defaults to two weeks ago. For a one-off historical check, widen this - a targeted name search returns matches from any date. Broad terms over long windows may hit the 1,000-match cap.
maxItemsNoOptional cap on billed dataset items returned.
firstNameNoOptional first name, to narrow an individual-debtor search.
watchlistNoA list of company names or surnames to check in one run. Ideal for scheduled monitoring - run this Actor daily against your counterparties and get any new insolvency publications. Overrides the single "name" field when set.
exactMatchNoOff (default): contains-search - the term is matched anywhere in the name. On: match the term exactly as typed (you may include the portal wildcard * yourself).
maxResultsNoMaximum publications to export across all queries in this run.
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the register returns 'too many matches' instead of results (differentiating from 'no insolvencies'), and notes that advanced fields beyond the schema are accepted. However, it omits details on data freshness, rate limits, or response format.

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 description is a single coherent paragraph that is front-loaded with purpose. It is clear and not excessively long, though it could benefit from bullet points or subheadings for readability.

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?

Given 11 parameters and no output schema, the description covers key edge cases (too many matches, watchlist usage, default dates) and mentions additional accepted fields. It lacks explicit return structure details but is largely complete.

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 100%, yet the description adds significant value: explains 'name' as contains-search, 'state' filter helps avoid cap, 'dateFrom' defaults, 'exactMatch' behavior, and 'watchlist' for bulk monitoring. This goes well beyond the schema alone.

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 clearly identifies the tool as a search of Germany's official insolvency register by debtor name, listing specific returned fields (court, case number, etc.). It is distinct from sibling tools like regdata_czech_isir_insolvency or regdata_spain_concursal.

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?

The description explains when to use the tool (for German insolvency searches) and provides guidance on handling the 'too many matches' scenario by narrowing queries. It also notes that no API key is required. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools for similar purposes.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Nolpak14/getregdata'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server