property-mortgage-mcp
Server Details
UK mortgage calculators: stamp duty, MCOB 3A HNW qualification, and bridging loan cost.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.4/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.
Each tool targets a distinct area: HNW mortgage qualification, bridging loan cost calculation, and stamp duty calculation. There is no overlap in functionality, so an agent can clearly differentiate them.
Tool names use mixed prefixes (fd_ vs uk_) and mixed patterns (noun_verb vs noun_noun). While descriptive, they lack a uniform convention, making it slightly harder to predict tool names.
Three tools is on the lower end for a property/mortgage domain, but still acceptable for a specialized niche. The scope is focused on specific calculations, so the count is reasonable.
The set covers key specialist areas (high net worth, bridging, stamp duty) but lacks standard mortgage affordability or product comparison tools. For its stated purpose, there are noticeable gaps but not critical.
Available Tools
3 toolsfd_hnw_mortgage_qualificationHNW Mortgage Qualification (FCA MCOB 3A)ARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Check whether a UK mortgage applicant qualifies as a high net worth mortgage customer under FCA MCOB 3A. The test passes if annual net income is at least GBP 300,000 OR net assets are at least GBP 3,000,000. The net assets test INCLUDES primary residence equity (per the literal FCA glossary G2953 and UK lender practice) and INCLUDES pension by default. Supports single applicant or joint application. Returns verdict, per-applicant test breakdown, joint household aggregate (if joint), and a routing recommendation including the relevant UK private bank list. Calculated by Fox Davidson, FCA-authorised UK mortgage brokers (FRN 600427). Use when a user asks whether they qualify for a high net worth mortgage, about MCOB 3A, the GBP 300k income or GBP 3m net assets test, private bank mortgages, or large loans against assets.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| applicant_1 | Yes | The primary applicant. | |
| applicant_2 | No | Optional. If provided, the tool runs the joint application test which returns each applicant individually plus a joint household aggregate. Most lenders apply the MCOB 3A test per individual customer. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Disclosures beyond annotations: includes primary residence equity, pension by default, returns breakdown per applicant and joint aggregate, and mentions routing recommendation. Annotations only declare readOnly and idempotent; description adds significant behavioral detail without contradiction.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single paragraph with efficient coverage of purpose, test rules, applicant support, return values, and provider. Minimal redundancy. Could be slightly more structured but is appropriately sized for the complexity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Covers all needed aspects: regulatory context, test criteria, asset inclusion rules, joint application behavior, return breakdown, and authority of the provider. No output schema, but return values are described. Complete for the tool's complexity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so each parameter is described. The description adds context on how parameters relate to the test (e.g., net assets include pension and primary residence) and explains the include_pension_in_test parameter's typical lender practice. This adds value beyond schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool checks HNW mortgage qualification under FCA MCOB 3A with specific thresholds (£300k income or £3m net assets). It distinguishes from the sibling tool (uk_stamp_duty_calculator) which handles a different topic. The verb 'check' and resource 'mortgage qualification' are precise.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly lists use cases: when user asks about HNW mortgage, MCOB 3A, income/assets test, private bank mortgages, large loans. It also mentions joint application support. No explicit when-not-to-use, but the context is clear enough for the agent to decide.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
uk_bridging_loan_calculatorUK Bridging Loan Calculator (with MCOB 3A term check)ARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Calculate the full cost of a UK bridging loan: total interest, arrangement and exit fees, valuation/legal/admin costs, gross facility, net advance, loan-to-value, total cost of finance and an indicative annualised cost. Supports rolled-up (compounding), retained (deducted upfront) and serviced (paid monthly) interest. Also runs the FCA MCOB 3A high net worth check: on a regulated bridge, an applicant with annual net income of at least GBP 300,000 OR net assets of at least GBP 3,000,000 can have a term up to 60 months instead of the standard 12-month cap. Calculated by Fox Davidson, FCA-authorised UK mortgage brokers (FRN 600427). Use when a user asks what a bridging loan costs, about bridging interest (rolled-up, retained or serviced), bridging LTV, regulated vs unregulated bridging, or the maximum term on a regulated bridge.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| regulated | No | True if the bridge is secured against a property the borrower lives in or intends to live in (regulated). False for investment or commercial security (unregulated). | |
| term_months | No | Loan term in months. | |
| exit_fee_pct | No | Exit fee as a percentage, charged on redemption. Often 0. | |
| admin_fees_gbp | No | Admin and other fees in pounds. | |
| legal_fees_gbp | No | Lender and borrower legal fees in pounds. | |
| net_assets_gbp | No | Optional. Borrower net assets including main residence equity and pension, minus all debts, used for the MCOB 3A high net worth term check. GBP 3,000,000 or more passes the net assets limb. | |
| monthly_rate_pct | No | Monthly interest rate as a percentage, for example 0.75 for 0.75% per month. | |
| exit_fee_on_gross | No | Whether the exit fee is charged on the gross loan (true) or the net loan (false). | |
| valuation_fee_gbp | No | Valuation fee in pounds. | |
| interest_structure | No | 'rolled' compounds monthly and is paid at exit. 'retained' deducts the full term of interest from the advance upfront. 'serviced' is paid monthly. Retained and serviced cost the same; rolled-up costs more. | |
| property_value_gbp | Yes | Open market value of the security property in pounds. | |
| arrangement_fee_pct | No | Lender arrangement fee as a percentage of the loan. | |
| additional_funds_gbp | No | Additional cash required beyond clearing existing charges, in pounds. | |
| existing_charges_gbp | No | Existing mortgages or loans the bridge will repay, in pounds. | |
| annual_net_income_gbp | No | Optional. Borrower annual net income, used for the MCOB 3A high net worth term check. GBP 300,000 or more passes the income limb. | |
| add_arrangement_fee_to_loan | No | Whether the arrangement fee is financed into the gross loan (true) or paid separately in cash (false). |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description goes beyond these by detailing the FCA MCOB 3A high net worth check and its implications on the maximum term (60 months vs 12-month cap). It also explains differences between interest structures (rolled-up costs more). This adds significant behavioral context without contradicting annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is well-structured, starting with the main calculation purpose, then listing outputs, interest structures, the MCOB check, and finally usage guidance. It is somewhat lengthy but each sentence contributes information. It could be slightly more concise but remains clear and organized.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's complexity (16 parameters, regulated/unregulated distinctions, MCOB check), the description covers the essential aspects: what is calculated, the three interest structures, the high net worth term check conditions, and the provider's FCA status. There is no output schema, but the description lists the return fields. Minor omission: it doesn't mention that the tool returns numerical values or the exact output format, but the listed components suffice.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds some value by explaining the MCOB 3A parameters (net_assets_gbp, annual_net_income_gbp) and the interest_structure enum differences. However, most parameter details are already in the schema, so the description provides only moderate additional semantic value.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description opens with a specific verb "Calculate" and a clear resource "UK bridging loan". It enumerates all cost components and interest structures, making the tool's purpose unmistakable. It also explicitly lists use cases (e.g., "what a bridging loan costs", "bridging interest"), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like fd_hnw_mortgage_qualification and uk_stamp_duty_calculator.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description includes explicit usage cues: "Use when a user asks what a bridging loan costs, about bridging interest (rolled-up, retained or serviced), bridging LTV, regulated vs unregulated bridging, or the maximum term on a regulated bridge." This provides clear context for when to invoke this tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the guidance is sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
uk_stamp_duty_calculatorUK Stamp Duty Calculator (SDLT / LBTT / LTT)ARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Calculate UK stamp duty on a property purchase across England/Northern Ireland (SDLT), Scotland (LBTT) and Wales (LTT). Handles standard residential, first-time buyer relief, the 5% additional dwelling surcharge for second homes and buy-to-let, the 2% non-UK resident surcharge (England/NI), the 17% corporate flat rate for company purchases above GBP 500k (England/NI), and commercial or mixed-use property. Returns banded breakdown, total tax payable and effective rate. Uses current 2026 bands and surcharge rates. Calculated by Fox Davidson, FCA-authorised UK mortgage brokers (FRN 600427). Use when a user asks about stamp duty, SDLT, LBTT, LTT, additional dwelling surcharge, ADS, first-time buyer relief, non-resident surcharge, or tax on a specific UK property purchase.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| region | No | Tax region. 'england' covers England and Northern Ireland (SDLT). 'scotland' uses LBTT. 'wales' uses LTT. | |
| buyer_type | No | Buyer category. 'standard' is a main residence purchase. 'ftb' is first-time buyer (England/NI relief up to GBP 500k; Scotland FTB to GBP 175k; Wales has no FTB relief). 'additional' triggers the second-home surcharge. 'nonresident' adds the 2% non-UK resident surcharge (England/NI only). 'corporate' applies the 17% flat rate above GBP 500k (England/NI residential) or standard rates plus surcharge below threshold or in Scotland/Wales. 'commercial' uses non-residential bands. | |
| property_price_gbp | Yes | Property purchase price in pounds. Example: 750000. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark it read-only and idempotent. Description adds value by specifying returns (banded breakdown, total tax, effective rate) and authority (Fox Davidson, FCA-authorised). No contradictions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Description is well-structured with main purpose first, then details. Each sentence adds value, though 'Use when' could be integrated. Not overly verbose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's complexity (3 params, 2 enums, no output schema), the description fully covers regions, reliefs, surcharges, and usage scenarios. Includes authority and example price, making it complete for agent use.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3. Description adds meaning beyond schema by explaining buyer type effects (e.g., ftb limits per region) and region coverage (england includes NI).
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool calculates UK stamp duty across multiple regions and reliefs, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes from the sibling mortgage qualification tool.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly states when to use the tool (e.g., user asks about stamp duty, SDLT, etc.). Does not explicitly mention when not to use, but the sibling tool is clearly different, so guidance is adequate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!