Skip to main content
Glama

UK Due Diligence

by io.github.paulieb89

Get Gazette Notice Full Text

gazette_notice
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch the full legal wording of a Gazette notice by numeric notice ID.

Returns the complete JSON-LD linked-data record for the notice: parties, legal basis, court, and full text. Use gazette_insolvency first to find notice_numeric_id values.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
notice_idYesNumeric Gazette notice ID. Returned as notice_numeric_id by gazette_insolvency.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the readOnly and idempotent annotations, the description adds that the response is a complete JSON-LD record including parties, legal basis, court, and full text. It does not mention error handling or potential limits, but the key behavioral traits are well covered.

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?

Two sentences efficiently deliver purpose, return contents, and a usage prerequisite. The structure is front-loaded with the action and avoids any redundant phrasing.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Despite having an output schema, the description provides a succinct summary of return fields and gives the necessary upstream step. For a single-parameter fetch operation, this is complete and well-integrated with sibling tools.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The schema already fully describes notice_id as the numeric ID returned by gazette_insolvency, and the description echoes this without adding new meaning. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 it fetches the full legal wording of a Gazette notice by numeric notice ID, distinguishing it from search-like siblings such as gazette_insolvency. The verb 'Fetch' and specific resource make the purpose unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly instructs users to use gazette_insolvency first to obtain notice_numeric_id values, providing a clear workflow and implicit alternative. This is direct guidance on when to use this tool versus another.

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

All UK Due Diligence toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The domain-specific tools are clearly distinct (search vs profile for each register), and the generic search/fetch tools are designed to route across them. Potential overlap between company_officers and company_psc is resolved by clear descriptions of officers vs beneficial ownership. Slight ambiguity exists between generic fetch/search and the domain-specific counterparts, but the routing logic is well-documented.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a consistent resource_action pattern with clear prefixes (charity_, company_, disqualified_, gazette_). Exceptions like company_officers, company_psc, sanctions_screen, and vat_validate deviate from the verb-first convention, and generic tools (fetch, search, get_prompt, list_prompts) do not follow the pattern. Overall, the naming is readable and predictable despite a few outliers.

Tool Count4/5

With 17 tools, the server sits slightly above the typical 3-15 well-scoped range, but the breadth of the domain (Companies House, Charity Commission, disqualifications, Gazette insolvency, sanctions, land registry, VAT) justifies the count. Each tool serves a distinct data source or action, and the two prompt-management tools are standard MCP utilities. The count feels appropriate rather than excessive.

Completeness4/5

The server covers the core due diligence workflow: searching and retrieving profiles for companies, charities, and disqualified directors, plus insolvency notices, sanctions screening, land transactions, and VAT validation. Minor gaps exist, such as no direct tool for company accounts or court judgments, but these are not core to the apparent purpose and can be worked around.

Resources