mcp-server

Compare Scenarios

compare_scenarios

Read-only

Side-by-side comparison of 2-8 jurisdictions across every wealth-protection dimension at once: tax (income/CGT/inheritance/wealth top rates + territorial-vs-worldwide + special regimes), crypto-asset treatment, tax-residence day-count, trust/foundation structure availability, reporting (CRS/EU-list/DAC6) and succession/forced-heirship. The synthesis view over the tax, residence, structure, reporting and succession layers. Pass scenarios as an array of {cc,pathway} or cc as a comma list (e.g. AE,PT,SG). Informational only, not advice; combine with the immigration route and a specific double-tax-treaty corridor for the full picture.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cc`	No	ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code, uppercase (e.g. "PT" Portugal, "AE" United Arab Emirates, "KN" St Kitts and Nevis).
`scenarios`	No	Array of scenario objects to compare side by side, each naming a programme id and the family composition and options to price.

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.

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / cc / description

Added value: +"ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code, uppercase (e.g. \"PT\" Portugal, \"AE\" United Arab Emirates, \"KN\" St Kitts and Nevis)."

addedInput schema / properties / cc / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  "PT",
+  "AE"
+]
```

addedInput schema / properties / scenarios / description

Added value: +"Array of scenario objects to compare side by side, each naming a programme id and the family composition and options to price."

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"
+}

AddedJun 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those flags: it is 'informational only, not advice', limited to 2-8 jurisdictions, and positioned as a synthesis view that should be combined with other tools for a complete picture.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded and information-dense, but the second sentence, 'The synthesis view over the tax, residence, structure, reporting and succession layers,' largely repeats the dimension list from the first sentence. It is useful but slightly redundant, so it does not quite achieve maximal conciseness.

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 an output schema exists and the annotations cover safety, the description provides enough operational context: jurisdictional scope, covered dimensions, input formats, limitations, and next steps. It is complete for practical use, though it leaves the semantics of 'pathway' mostly to the schema.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that cc can be supplied as a comma-separated list (e.g. 'AE,PT,SG') and by summarizing the scenario shape as {cc,pathway}, which is not fully explicit in the schema alone.

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 opens with a specific action and resource: 'Side-by-side comparison of 2-8 jurisdictions across every wealth-protection dimension at once.' It then enumerates the exact covered layers, which clearly separates this synthesis tool from single-dimension siblings like get_country_tax or compare_formation.

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 clear input conventions ('Pass scenarios as an array of {cc,pathway} or cc as a comma list') and contextual guidance ('Informational only, not advice; combine with the immigration route and a specific double-tax-treaty corridor for the full picture'). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the intended use case is clear.

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.