capabilities

List UK company charges and mortgages from Companies House

company_uk_charges

Read-onlyIdempotent

Charges registered against a UK company at Companies House — mortgages, debentures and other security — with dates, classification, particulars and the persons entitled. Use when: Establish whether a UK company has outstanding security over its assets, and who holds it. Not for: You need insolvency proceedings — not currently supported (see the resource flags on company.uk.profile). Related: company_uk_profile; company_uk_filings; company_uk_status. Price: USD 0.006/call (x402), 0.005 (account key).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum charges to return per page (1-100). Default 3: a charge carries free-text particulars, secured details and the persons entitled, so it is several times the size of an officer or a filing row - the register-wide counts and page.total still describe the whole register.
`detail`	No	How much of each charge to return. Default summary. `full` adds the four members the register populates only for particular filings — acquired_on, resolved_on, assets_ceased_released and more_than_four_persons_entitled — which are null on the great majority of charges.
`offset`	No	Zero-based index into the register's charge list (not into the filtered result). Pass back page.next_offset from the previous response to page.
`status`	No	Which charges to return. Default `all`. `outstanding` returns the charges that are still security over the company (everything the register has not marked satisfied or fully-satisfied, including part-satisfied); `satisfied` returns the discharged ones. The register offers no server-side filter, so Eckari applies it after reading up to three register pages of 100 charges — read page.has_more rather than items.length.
`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.charges
`meta`	Yes

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already establish that this is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the scope limitation about insolvency and points to resource flags, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as auth needs, rate limits, or output-shape caveats in prose. With the annotation bar lower, a 3 is appropriate.

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 front-loaded with the core result, then uses compact labeled sections for use, not-for, related tools, and price. Every sentence contributes selection or invocation value, and the longer parameter notes are justified by the tool's complexity.

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?

For a five-parameter tool with a rich output schema, the definition covers what the tool does, when to use it, what it is not for, related resources, pricing, and the main limitations. The schema and annotations complete the operational details, so nothing needed for correct invocation is left ambiguous.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline applies. The prose description does not add parameter-level meaning beyond what the input schema already provides; the schema's detailed parameter notes are doing the work, but that is structured data rather than extra description value.

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 states exactly what the tool returns: charges registered against a UK company at Companies House, with charge types, dates, classification, particulars, and persons entitled. This is specific enough to distinguish it clearly from siblings like company_uk_filings, company_uk_profile, and company_uk_status.

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 gives explicit 'Use when' and 'Not for' guidance, names the relevant decision (outstanding security and who holds it), explicitly excludes insolvency proceedings, and lists related tools. An agent can determine when to select this tool without inferring the conditions.

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?