mcp-server

Compare Programmes

compare_programmes

Read-only

Compare programmes side by side. Pass a + b (two programme ids) for the canonical versioned comparison artefact from the Mirabello Investment Migration Index: rank, composite, the dimension scores, per-dimension deltas, per-metric leads (a|b|tie) and the human compare page URL where one exists. Or pass ids (2-4) for the classic multi-column comparison of cost, processing, mobility, family inclusion, tax, path to citizenship.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`a`	No	programme id (use with b) for the canonical two-programme artefact
`b`	No	programme id (use with a)
`ids`	No	2-4 programme ids for the classic comparison

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`error`	No	Present only when the request could not be fulfilled.
`terms`	No	Acceptable-use and information-not-advice terms.
`source`	No	Attribution for the data.
`provider`	No	Always "Mirabello Consultancy".
`disclaimer`	No	Information, not legal/tax/financial/immigration advice; figures indicative.
`data_updated`	No	Date the underlying dataset was last updated.
`book_a_consultation`	No	URL to book a Mirabello consultation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedJul 27, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "Mirabello response envelope. Tool-specific fields vary; the provenance/disclaimer envelope is always present.",
+  "properties": {
+    "book_a_consultation": {
+      "description": "URL to book a Mirabello consultation.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "data_updated": {
+      "description": "Date the underlying dataset was last updated.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "disclaimer": {
+      "description": "Information, not legal/tax/financial/immigration advice; figures indicative.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "description": "Present only when the request could not be fulfilled.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "provider": {
+      "description": "Always \"Mirabello Consultancy\".",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "description": "Attribution for the data.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "terms": {
+      "description": "Acceptable-use and information-not-advice terms.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed4 schema fields changedJul 3, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / a

Added value: +{
+  "description": "programme id (use with b) for the canonical two-programme artefact",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / b

Added value: +{
+  "description": "programme id (use with a)",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / ids / description

Added value: +"2-4 programme ids for the classic comparison"

removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "ids"
-]
```

First observedJun 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by detailing what the output contains (rank, composite, dimension scores, deltas, leads, URL) and clarifies that the URL is conditional ('where one exists'). It also distinguishes the two artefacts (canonical versioned vs classic) which helps set expectations. This goes beyond annotations and provides useful transparency.

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 two sentences with zero filler. It front-loads the core purpose, then efficiently explains the two invocation modes and their outputs. Every piece of information earns its place; no redundancies. The structure is easy to scan and digest.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool has an output schema (so return details are covered elsewhere) and annotations (safety covered), the description covers all decision-relevant aspects: choosing between the two modes, what parameters to pass, and what outputs to expect. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly. A minor enhancement could explicitly note that a and b should not be combined with ids, but the phrasing 'Or pass ids' makes this sufficiently clear.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% (each parameter has a description). The description adds extra semantic value by explaining that 'a' and 'b' are used together for the two-programme canonical artefact, and that 'ids' is used for the 2-4 programme classic comparison. This clarifies the mutually exclusive usage and the relationship between parameters, which the schema alone does not convey.

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's function: compare programmes side by side. It names two distinct invocation modes (a+b for the canonical artefact, ids for the classic multi-column comparison) and enumerates the specific outputs of each (rank, composite, dimension scores, deltas, leads, URL; cost, processing, mobility, etc.). It differentiates from sibling tools like compare_formation or compare_scenarios by specifying the programme context and the Mirabello Index.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use each parameter set: 'Pass a + b... Or pass ids (2-4)'. This is clear usage guidance for the two modes. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over sibling comparison tools (e.g., compare_scenarios, compare_formation), though the object of comparison (programmes) is implied. It provides good guidance within the tool but not exclusions across siblings.

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

All mcp-server tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.