Skip to main content
Glama

list_legal_forms

Retrieve all Swiss company legal forms like AG and GmbH to identify business structures in Switzerland.

Instructions

List all Swiss company legal forms (AG, GmbH, etc.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler implementation for the `list_legal_forms` tool, which returns a hardcoded list of common Swiss legal forms.
    case "list_legal_forms": {
      // ZEFIX /legalForms requires authentication (403). Return common Swiss legal forms.
      const forms = [
        { code: "0101", name: "Einzelunternehmen", nameEn: "Sole proprietorship" },
        { code: "0103", name: "Kollektivgesellschaft", nameEn: "General partnership" },
        { code: "0104", name: "Kommanditgesellschaft", nameEn: "Limited partnership" },
        { code: "0105", name: "Aktiengesellschaft (AG)", nameEn: "Corporation (AG)" },
        { code: "0106", name: "Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung (GmbH)", nameEn: "Limited liability company (GmbH)" },
        { code: "0107", name: "Genossenschaft", nameEn: "Cooperative" },
        { code: "0108", name: "Verein", nameEn: "Association" },
        { code: "0109", name: "Stiftung", nameEn: "Foundation" },
        { code: "0110", name: "Kommanditaktiengesellschaft", nameEn: "Partnership limited by shares" },
        { code: "0113", name: "Filiale ausländischer Gesellschaft", nameEn: "Branch of foreign company" },
        { code: "0114", name: "Institut des öffentlichen Rechts", nameEn: "Public law institution" },
      ];
      return JSON.stringify(forms, null, 2);
    }
  • The input schema definition for the `list_legal_forms` tool.
    {
      name: "list_legal_forms",
      description: "List all Swiss company legal forms (AG, GmbH, etc.)",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {},
      },
    },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool lists legal forms but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether it's a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication needs, or the format/scope of the returned list (e.g., completeness, ordering).

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple listing tool.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a zero-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but lacks completeness. It doesn't explain the return format (e.g., list structure, fields) or behavioral context, which could help an agent use it correctly despite the simplicity.

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 tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose without redundant parameter details, aligning with the baseline for zero-parameter tools.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('Swiss company legal forms'), with specific examples (AG, GmbH) that clarify the domain. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on legal forms rather than other Swiss data types, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with any specific sibling tool.

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. While the description implies it's for retrieving Swiss legal forms, it doesn't mention prerequisites, related tools (e.g., get_company for company details), or constraints like data freshness.

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/vikramgorla/mcp-swiss'

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