Skip to main content
Glama

get_company_shareholders

Retrieve shareholder information for companies in the Spanish stock exchange to analyze ownership structures and investment relationships.

Instructions

Get shareholders for a specific company

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
companyIdYesCompany ID

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler function that implements the tool logic: fetches shareholder positions from the API endpoint '/api/shareholder-positions', resolves the company symbol from company ID, and filters shareholders matching the company's symbol.
    async getCompanyShareholders(companyId: string): Promise<any[]> {
      const data = await this.fetchAPI('/api/shareholder-positions');
      const shareholders = data.shareholderPositions || data.positions || [];
      
      // Find company by ID first to get symbol
      const companies = await this.getAllCompanies();
      const company = companies.find(c => c.id === companyId);
      if (!company) return [];
    
      return shareholders.filter(position => 
        position.company_symbol === company.symbol || 
        position.ticker === company.symbol
      );
    }
  • src/index.ts:144-157 (registration)
    Tool registration in the listTools handler, defining the tool name, description, and input schema.
    {
      name: 'get_company_shareholders',
      description: 'Get shareholders for a specific company',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          companyId: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Company ID',
          },
        },
        required: ['companyId'],
      },
    },
  • Dispatch handler in the CallToolRequestSchema that invokes the database method with the provided companyId argument.
    case 'get_company_shareholders':
      result = await this.db.getCompanyShareholders((args as any)?.companyId);
      break;
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose if this is a read-only operation, requires authentication, has rate limits, returns paginated results, or what the output format might be, which is inadequate for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it appropriately sized. However, it's not front-loaded with critical details like scope or alternatives, which slightly reduces its effectiveness despite the brevity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of shareholder data, no annotations, no output schema, and 1 parameter, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, data scope, or behavioral traits, making it insufficient for an agent to use the tool effectively without guesswork.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description adds no parameter semantics beyond the input schema, which has 100% coverage and documents the single 'companyId' parameter. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline is 3, and the description doesn't compensate with additional context like ID format or examples.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description 'Get shareholders for a specific company' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('shareholders'), but it's vague about scope (e.g., all shareholders vs. top ones) and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'get_top_shareholders_by_sector' or 'get_shareholder_overlap'. It avoids tautology but lacks specificity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, exclusions, or compare to sibling tools like 'get_top_shareholders_by_sector' for filtered results or 'get_shareholder_overlap' for relational data, leaving usage context implied at best.

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/anbrme/ibex35-mcp-server'

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