mcp-server

Get Processing Times

get_processing_times

Read-only

Processing-time estimate for one programme (by id) or all programmes: the typical government processing range, the basis of the estimate and its source. Use when the user asks how long an application takes. Figures are indicative and vary with the case and the workload of the authority.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No	Programme id as returned by list_programmes (e.g. "dominica-cbi", "greece-gv", "portugal-gv"). Not a country name and not a website slug.

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, when it is not Mirabello Consultancy itself.
`book_url`	No	Link to request a consultation with a Mirabello specialist, for a personal case.
`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.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 8, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / book_a_consultation

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "URL to book a Mirabello consultation.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

addedOutput schema / properties / book_url

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Link to request a consultation with a Mirabello specialist, for a personal case.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / source / description

Previous value: -"Attribution for the data."New value: +"Attribution for the data, when it is not Mirabello Consultancy itself."

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / id / description

Added value: +"Programme id as returned by list_programmes (e.g. \"dominica-cbi\", \"greece-gv\", \"portugal-gv\"). Not a country name and not a website slug."

addedInput schema / properties / id / examples

Added value: +[
+  "dominica-cbi",
+  "greece-gv"
+]

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"
+}

First observedJun 4, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and a closed-world scope, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond them: the figures are indicative, vary with the case, and depend on authority workload, which tells the agent to hedge rather than assert a hard number.

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?

Front-loaded with what is returned, then the usage trigger, then the reliability caveat. Three compact sentences with no padding, though 'the basis of the estimate and its source' is somewhat redundant detail against the existing output schema.

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?

For a single-optional-parameter read tool with full schema documentation, annotations and an output schema, this covers what is returned, when to call it, and the data-quality caveat. The only real gap is the lack of explicit routing against the nearby timeline-estimation siblings.

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% and the id parameter carries examples and format warnings ('not a country name and not a website slug'). The description still adds value the schema does not: id selects one programme and its absence returns all programmes, which is not stated anywhere in the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('processing-time estimate for one programme or all programmes') and even explains the two modes of operation via the optional id. An agent can tell what it returns, though it never names the close sibling estimate_timeline or find_fastest_citizenship, so differentiation is left to inference.

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?

'Use when the user asks how long an application takes' gives a clear triggering condition. It also implies that omitting id returns all programmes. However there is no when-not guidance and no explicit routing against estimate_timeline, which is the obvious alternative for timeline questions.

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.