mcp-server

Regulator Registry

get_regulator_registry

Read-only

Registry of the regulatory bodies that govern tax, company formation, accounting, treaties and banking per jurisdiction — ranked most-to-least important, with official-source links (tax authority, company registrar, financial/AML regulator, central bank, specialists like FDIC, DFSA, ADGM FSRA, Cayman CIMA) — plus the international layer (FATF, EU Code of Conduct list, OECD, DG TAXUD, FSB). Pass cc for one jurisdiction, or international:true for the supranational bodies.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cc`	No	ISO alpha-2 (or roster key like MY-LABUAN, KZ-AIFC)
`international`	No	True to include international/offshore structures rather than domestic-only options.

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 changedSep 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / international / description

Added value: +"True to include international/offshore structures rather than domestic-only options."

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"
+}

AddedJul 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds context about output structure (ranked list, official-source links, types of regulators) and the international layer, which goes beyond the schema and is useful. It does not contradict annotations.

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?

The description is a single dense paragraph, but every sentence adds information: purpose, ranking, links, international layer, and usage. It is not overly verbose, though it could be split into clearer sentences. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 (per context signals), the description does not need to explain return values. It covers purpose, invocation, parameter semantics, and content scope. It lacks edge-case guidance (e.g., invalid cc, conflicting parameters), but for a read-only registry with two optional parameters, it is sufficiently complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds critical semantics: it clarifies that cc and international are mutually exclusive ways to query ('Pass cc for one jurisdiction, or international:true'), and provides example formats for cc (ISO alpha-2 or roster keys). This goes well beyond the schema descriptions, which only say 'ISO alpha-2 (or roster key like MY-LABUAN, KZ-AIFC)' and 'True to include international/offshore structures'. The description makes the parameter relationship explicit.

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 returns a registry of regulatory bodies per jurisdiction, with ranking and links, and includes an international layer. It is specific about the content and scope (tax, company formation, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools that cover narrower topics like get_country_tax or get_company_formation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains how to invoke the tool ('Pass cc for one jurisdiction, or international:true'), but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state when to prefer this over other registry-type tools. The guidance is implicit rather than explicit, so an agent must infer the use case.

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.