capabilities

Check UK company accounts due dates on Companies House

company_uk_accounts

Read-onlyIdempotent

Return the accounts filing status of a UK company from the Companies House register — the accounting reference date, the last accounts filed (type and period), the next accounts due date and a derived overdue flag. Use when: When are this UK company's accounts due? Not for: You need financial figures (turnover, profit, balance sheet) — not on the public register API. Related: company_uk_filings; company_uk_profile; company_uk_status. Price: USD 0.003/call (x402), 0.002 (account key).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`company_number`	Yes	Companies House company number, also called the company registration number (CRN). Accepted shapes are the register's own — 1-8 digits (zero-padded to 8, e.g. 445790 → 00445790), one letter + 7 digits (R0000001), two letters + 6 digits (SC002180, NI000001, OC123456, OE000001), or the registered-society suffix forms (two letters + 5 digits + 1 letter; two letters + 4 digits + 2 letters). Case-insensitive; surrounding whitespace is ignored (which is why maxLength is 10); internal spaces and punctuation are not accepted. Any other value (for example PROBE) is rejected as INVALID_INPUT before payment and before any upstream call.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	Capability output; full JSON Schema at https://api.eckari.com/v1/capabilities/company.uk.accounts
`meta`	Yes

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond those annotations: the derived overdue flag, the fact that financial figures are not available through the register API, and per-call pricing. No contradiction 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 well front-loaded with the primary purpose and output, then efficiently covers usage, exclusions, related tools, and pricing. Each section earns its place, though the pricing detail is slightly tangential to tool selection and invocation.

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 one required parameter with thorough schema documentation, an output schema, and clear usage boundaries, the description is complete. It tells the agent what the tool returns, when to use it, when not to use it, and how it relates to siblings. Nothing essential is missing for correct selection and invocation.

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 schema fully covers the single parameter with a detailed explanation of accepted company number formats and rejection behavior. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description does not need to compensate, and it provides no additional parameter-level meaning 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Return the accounts filing status of a UK company from the Companies House register.' It also enumerates the exact outputs (accounting reference date, last accounts filed, next due date, overdue flag), which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like company_uk_profile or company_uk_filings.

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 gives an explicit trigger ('When are this UK company's accounts due?') and a clear exclusion ('Not for: You need financial figures'). It names related sibling tools, though it does not fully explain when each of those siblings should be chosen instead. This is clear context but stops short of a complete routing guide.

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

All capabilities tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Tools are largely distinct, targeting specific entities (UK company, US company, domain, LEI, FX, location, parcel, weather) or sub-aspects (e.g., accounts vs. charges vs. directors). Overlap exists between company.uk.profile and company.uk.status (both contain status info, but the latter is cheaper and focused). Also, company.uk.filings and company.us.filings_latest could be confused if an agent generalizes 'filings' across jurisdictions.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent pattern: domain_entity_subject (e.g., company_uk_accounts, domain_expiry, weather_us_alerts). Underscores and lower case are used throughout. Verbs are implied by the noun (e.g., 'search' for lookup, 'detect' for identification). No mixed conventions or unpredictable names.

Tool Count4/5

24 tools is on the high side but still reasonable for a general-purpose data server spanning multiple domains (company, domain, entity, fx, location, parcel, weather). Each domain gets a cohesive set, and the documentation justifies each tool. Could be slightly leaner if some niche tools (e.g., domain_expiry vs. registration) were merged, but overall scoping is acceptable.

Completeness4/5

Each domain offers good coverage: UK company tools cover CRUD-like operations (profile, status, search, filings, charges, directors, owners, registered office); similarly for US companies (profile, filings, resolve, latest filings). Weather has forecast, observation, alerts. Parcel only detects carrier (no tracking). Missing features like advanced filtering on company filings or less common domains, but core workflows are covered.

Resources

Need Help?