USE THIS to verify a Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) before relying on it — do not assume a 20-character code is valid. Checks the ISO 17442 / ISO 7064 MOD 97-10 check digits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lei | Yes | The 20-character LEI, e.g. 5493001KJTIIGC8Y1R12. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses that the tool checks the ISO 17442 / ISO 7064 MOD 97-10 check digits, which goes beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by specifying the validation algorithm. It does not describe the return format or behavior on invalid input, but the core behavioral detail is sufficient.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences with no redundant information. The imperative 'USE THIS to verify' effectively front-loads the purpose, and each sentence contributes valuable context about usage and behavior.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given a single parameter, no output schema, and simple validation behavior, the description covers the tool's input, purpose, and algorithm adequately. It does not specify the return value (e.g., boolean or result object), but this is a minor omission for a straightforward validator.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema already documents the single parameter 'lei' with a description and example, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional semantic information about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states it verifies a Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) using specific standards (ISO 17442 / ISO 7064 MOD 97-10). The verb 'verify' and the specific resource 'LEI' are precise, and the tool is distinguished from sibling validators by its unique target.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly instructs to use this tool before relying on an LEI and warns not to assume a 20-character code is valid. This provides clear context for when to invoke the tool and a key caveat, though it does not list alternative tools (which are self-evident from sibling names).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a specific identifier or operation (e.g., validate_iban, parse_date, is_holiday). Even similar tools like validate_isbn and validate_isbn10 are distinct by version. There is no overlap or ambiguity.
Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (validate_xxx, parse_xxx, format_currency). The exception is 'next_holiday', which uses an adjective instead of a verb. Otherwise consistent.
With 47 tools, the set is very large. While each tool is distinct, the count exceeds the recommended range (25+ is considered too many) and may overwhelm users or agents.
Covers a wide array of international identifiers and utilities, but notable gaps exist (e.g., no Canada SIN, India PAN, Mexico CURP). The set is broad but not exhaustive for the domain of data validation.