Skip to main content
Glama
vdmeu

RegistrumMCP

by vdmeu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get director network

get_network

Map a UK company's corporate network through shared directors. Return all connected companies up to a chosen depth, revealing group structures and related-party relationships.

Instructions

Map the corporate network connected to a UK company via shared directors. Returns all companies connected through shared board members, up to the specified depth. Each connected company includes its name, number, status, and the directors it shares with the focal company. Useful for identifying corporate group structures, related party relationships, and director interlocks.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
depthNoTraversal depth: 1 = direct connections only, 2 = connections of connections (default 1). Depth 2 can return many results for large companies.
company_numberYesCompanies House company number, e.g. '00445790' for Tesco PLC. Numeric-only numbers should be zero-padded to 8 digits.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv2.0.5
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedInput schema / properties / company_number / description
      Previous value: -"Companies House company number, e.g. '00445790' for Tesco PLC"New value: +"Companies House company number, e.g. '00445790' for Tesco PLC. Numeric-only numbers should be zero-padded to 8 digits."
  2. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates a read-only behavior ('Map... Returns'), explains traversal semantics ('all companies connected through shared board members, up to the specified depth'), and describes the output fields. It does not mention pagination or de-duplication, but the schema's depth warning helps cover volume concerns.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured: one sentence for purpose, one for output and traversal, and one for use cases. Each sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 there is no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating returned fields (name, number, status, shared directors) and explaining the depth parameter's effect. It lacks explicit error or pagination behavior, but for a simple two-parameter read tool, the description plus schema provide sufficient context.

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%, with both parameters already having detailed descriptions. The tool description adds only generic references like 'focal company' and 'specified depth,' which do not meaningfully extend the schema's parameter documentation. 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 states the action ('Map the corporate network') and the resource ('connected to a UK company via shared directors'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_directors by focusing on the interconnected network of companies rather than a single company's director list. The scope and output are explicitly described.

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 clear use cases: 'identifying corporate group structures, related party relationships, and director interlocks.' It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the network-specific framing makes its applicability clear relative to single-entity siblings.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools