companies-house-screening-mcp

Get charges

get_charges

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check a UK company's secured debts: holders, coverage, creation date, satisfaction status. Use the outstanding charge count to screen suppliers and flag floating charges that cover all assets.

Instructions

Secured debt registered against a company: who holds each charge, what it covers, when it was created and whether it has been satisfied. outstanding_count is derived here because Companies House reports what has been settled but never what has not, and outstanding charges are the number that matters when screening a supplier or a debtor. A floating charge covering all assets is worth reading closely. Needs a company number.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`verbose`	No	Also return the untouched Companies House payload under `raw`, alongside the shaped result. Roughly two and a half times the size; use it only when a field you need is missing from the shaped result.
`company_number`	Yes	Eight-character Companies House number, such as 00000006 or SC123456. Leading zeros may be omitted. This tool does not accept a company name — call find_company first if that is all you have.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`raw`	No	The untouched Companies House payload. Present only when verbose was true.
`meta`	Yes	Provenance and budget for this answer.
`charges`	Yes
`total_count`	Yes
`company_number`	Yes
`satisfied_count`	Yes
`outstanding_count`	Yes	Derived: total minus satisfied and part-satisfied.
`part_satisfied_count`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.0Sep 5, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / meta / properties / licence / description

Previous value: -"Companies House data is Open Government Licence v3.0."New value: +"OGL v3.0 applies to eligible public-sector information. Personal data and other OGL exclusions are not licensed by this label; applicable data-protection duties still apply."

First observedv0.2.0Aug 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

While annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: outstanding_count is derived because Companies House does not report unsettled charges, and floating charges deserve closer scrutiny. This goes beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them.

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 four sentences and each contributes value: what the tool returns, an important derived-field nuance, a risk heuristic, and an input requirement. It is appropriately front-loaded with the core definition, though slightly longer than strictly necessary.

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 the output schema exists and the tool is a read-only retrieval operation, the description covers the essential context: what charges are, why the derived field matters, a caution about floating charges, and the required identifier. Minor gaps like pagination are not critical given the output schema.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents company_number and verbose. The description adds no new parameter-specific detail beyond restating that a company number is needed, which the schema already covers. A baseline 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 identifies the resource (secured debt/charges registered against a company) and the specific attributes returned: holder, coverage, creation date, and satisfaction status. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_company or get_psc, which address different company data domains.

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 a concrete use case ('when screening a supplier or a debtor') and states the required input ('Needs a company number'). It does not explicitly call out alternatives or when not to use the tool, but the schema does point to find_company when only a company name is available.

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

Deploy Server