Skip to main content
Glama

company_history

Retrieve the full chronological registry timeline for a company by slug or name. Returns events from oldest to newest, with candidate slugs if name matches multiple companies.

Instructions

Full registry timeline for one company, oldest first.

`company` is a company slug (e.g. vaz-metales-sl) or an exact-ish name;
if no slug matches, falls back to case-insensitive name search and, when
several companies match, returns the list of candidate slugs instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
companyYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral transparency. It details the company lookup behavior, including fallback to name search and candidate list when multiple matches, adding meaningful context beyond the schema. However, the limit parameter is not mentioned.

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 concise: two clear sentences for purpose, followed by a focused paragraph explaining the key parameter. No wasted words, front-loaded with the main action.

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 the output schema exists and the tool has only two parameters, the description is fairly complete. It covers main purpose, ordering, and parameter behavior, though it does not specify behavior when no company matches at all.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It provides thorough semantic detail for the 'company' parameter (slug, fallback, disambiguation) but offers nothing for 'limit'. Overall, adds significant value beyond the schema.

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 'Full registry timeline for one company, oldest first' clearly states the tool's purpose: retrieving a chronological timeline for a single company. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like daily_digest or registry_stats.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description explains how to use the company parameter (slug or name, fallback, disambiguation) but does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives. Usage is implied but not explicitly contrasted with siblings.

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/george-kozlitin/borme-mcp'

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