eu-filings
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| UK_COMPANIES_HOUSE_API_KEY | No | Free API key from Companies House for UK company data methods |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| eu-filingsC | Unified tool for European financial filings via ESEF (European Single Electronic Format): access company filings, financial statements, and XBRL data from EU regulated markets. Provides comprehensive access to financial reports from 27+ European countries using the filings.xbrl.org API. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusing it with another. The tool's purpose is clearly described, making selection unambiguous.
The single tool name 'eu-filings' is descriptive but does not follow the typical verb_noun convention seen in well-designed MCP servers. With only one tool, there is no pattern to violate, but it also fails to establish a consistent naming style.
A single tool is too few for a server that claims to provide comprehensive access to European financial filings across 27+ countries. The domain is complex and would benefit from separate tools for specific actions like retrieving filings, searching XBRL data, or fetching financial statements.
The server offers only a catch-all tool, lacking granular operations for distinct tasks such as searching, filtering, or comparing financial data. This creates significant gaps because agents cannot perform specific actions without relying on a single, overloaded interface.