Skip to main content
Glama

List the shareholders / members of a company

get_shareholders
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the legal-statutory shareholders, members, or quota-holders of a company from official government registries. Returns the published equity roster without ownership-threshold filters. Use for direct shareholder queries; for beneficial ownership, use the PSC tool instead.

Instructions

Return the shareholders / members / quota-holders of a company — the legal-statutory equity roster published by the company registry, with no ownership-threshold filter.

When to call this tool. Use this whenever the user asks about 'shareholders', 'members', 'quota-holders', or equivalents in other languages ('股东', '股東', 'actionnaires', 'socios', 'Gesellschafter', 'aksjonærer', 'aandeelhouders' etc.). This is a DIFFERENT concept from get_persons_with_significant_control (PSC / beneficial owners / UBO), which returns only persons above a statutory control threshold (typically >25%) on a separate beneficial-ownership register. Do NOT substitute PSC for a plain shareholder question — the two registers can disagree (a 10% shareholder is on the members register but not the PSC register; a corporate trustee can be a PSC without appearing on the members register). Call PSC only when the user explicitly asks about 'beneficial owners', 'who controls', 'PSC', 'UBO', or the threshold register.

Public disclosure is strongly legal-form-conditional. Private-limited / LLC forms typically disclose quota-holders in the public register; joint-stock / public-limited forms typically keep shareholders in a private book, so this tool may return an empty list, a pointer to the relevant filing, or a statutory explanation. Response shape varies by jurisdiction: some return a structured array, some return the filing(s) that carry the roster (you then call fetch_document on the returned document_id to read the actual list), some return threshold-crossing events for listed issuers. Every response includes a disclosure flag and/or explanatory note.

Always returns a jurisdiction_data object with the raw upstream fields verbatim. fresh: true bypasses the cache. Jurisdictions without this capability return 501.

Per-country caveats (which legal forms disclose, response shape, how to reconstruct a current roster from delta filings) are available on demand — call list_jurisdictions({jurisdiction:"<code>"}) for the full schema, or list_jurisdictions({supports_tool:"get_shareholders"}) for the country-support matrix. All registries are official government sources.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
jurisdictionYesISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code (uppercase). All registries are official government sources. Currently supported: AU, BE, CA, CA-BC, CA-NT, CH, CY, CZ, DE, ES, FI, FR, GB, HK, IE, IM, IS, IT, KR, KY, LI, MC, MX, MY, NL, NO, NZ, PL, RU, TW. Per-country capability, ID format, examples, status mapping, and caveats: call `list_jurisdictions({jurisdiction:'<code>'})`. To find which countries support a specific tool: `list_jurisdictions({supports_tool:'<tool>'})`.
company_idYes
freshNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queried_atYesISO-8601 + Europe/London timezone stamp for when the registry was queried.
jurisdictionNo
company_idNo
total_countNo
as_ofNo
itemsNo
dataNo
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destuctiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds behavioral context: different legal forms may return empty lists or pointers, returns a jurisdiction_data object, fresh:true bypasses cache, jurisdictions without capability return 501. No contradictions with annotations.

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 relatively long but well-structured with clear sections. It provides essential details without excessive verbosity. Slightly verbose for a simple list tool, but the complexity justifies the length.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (multiple response shapes, per-country variations, different legal forms), the description is highly complete. It explains what to expect, how to handle edge cases, and where to get more info. The output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed in the description.

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?

The input schema has 3 parameters with 33% coverage (only jurisdiction has a description). The description adds semantic meaning: company_id is implied as the company identifier, fresh bypasses cache. However, it does not explicitly describe each parameter's meaning beyond what the schema provides, but the tool's purpose is clear enough to infer parameter roles.

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 states the tool returns 'the legal-statutory equity roster published by the company registry' and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling tool get_persons_with_significant_control. Use cases and equivalent terms in multiple languages are provided.

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 provides an explicit 'When to call this tool' section with detailed guidance, including when NOT to call it (PSC-related queries) and what to call instead. It also explains response shape variations and gives per-country caveats.

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/sophymarine/openregistry'

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