Skip to main content
Glama

AINumbers Fintech Intelligence Suite

by co.ainumbers
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

ISO 20022-to-EVM Calldata Mapper

map_iso20022_to_evm_calldata
Read-onlyIdempotent

ISO 20022-to-EVM Calldata Mapper: OpenChainGraph compute node (compliance_mandate). Deterministic OpenChainGraph compute node. By default (compute:"auto") inputs are computed server-side on Cloudflare Workers for gpu:false nodes with a registered kernel; compute:"browser" forces client-side execution and returns a browser delegation URL instead. gpu:true nodes always delegate to the browser. Inputs are processed transiently to compute the response and are not stored, logged, or retained. Use synthetic or anonymised inputs only. Exports an AP2 artifact with execution_hash for chain provenance. Output feeds: art-291-screen-onledger-transfer-batch. Open at: https://ainumbers.co/chaingraph/art-288-map-iso20022-to-evm-calldata.html FV-status (published/proven/still-trusted for this spec): /fv-status/8498d0819c941fdb731f9e10f5d93ee929026919cb111a42149821b48b5ac180.json — a snapshot, not a subscription; this receipt verifies offline regardless of whether that file is ever fetched. Output schema: call describe_tool("map_iso20022_to_evm_calldata").

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
computeNoCompute mode (v0.4 Compute Binding). "auto" (default) = server for gpu:false nodes with registered kernels; "server" = force server-side; "browser" = always return browser delegation URL. gpu:true nodes always delegate.
parent_hashesNoexecution_hash values from upstream ChainGraph AP2 artifacts to chain from (sets chain.parent_hashes in the export).
parent_tool_idsNotool_id values matching parent_hashes, in the same order.
policy_parametersNoInput parameters for this tool's decision function. For gpu:false nodes with a registered kernel, these are computed server-side when compute is "auto" or "server". See the tool's manifest for field names.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "abi_type_coercions": {
-      "items": {
-        "properties": {
-          "abi_input": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "coercion": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "iso_field": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "type": {
-            "type": "string"
-          }
-        },
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    },
-    "draft_pinned": {
-      "type": "boolean"
-    },
-    "field_bindings": {
-      "items": {
-        "properties": {
-          "abi_input": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "iso_field": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "resolved": {
-            "type": "boolean"
-          },
-          "type": {
-            "type": "string"
-          }
-        },
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    },
-    "iso_message_type": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "mapping_ok": {
-      "type": "boolean"
-    },
-    "mapping_profile": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "mapping_profile_version": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "resolved_call": {
-      "properties": {
-        "args": {
-          "items": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "type": "array"
-        },
-        "function": {
-          "type": "string"
-        }
-      },
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "unmapped_required_fields": {
-      "type": "array"
-    },
-    "warnings": {
-      "type": "array"
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "abi_type_coercions": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "abi_input": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "coercion": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "iso_field": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "draft_pinned": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "field_bindings": {
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "abi_input": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "iso_field": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "resolved": {
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "iso_message_type": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "mapping_ok": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "mapping_profile": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "mapping_profile_version": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "resolved_call": {
+      "properties": {
+        "args": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "function": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "unmapped_required_fields": {
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "warnings": {
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld=false, but the description adds real operational context: transient processing with no storage or logging, the synthetic-inputs-only requirement, server vs browser delegation behavior, and the AP2 artifact with execution_hash for chain provenance. These are traits the annotations do not convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with a restatement of the name and title, then padded with a raw URL, a 64-hex FV-status path, and boilerplate about snapshots and offline verification. Much of this does not help an agent decide to call the tool or how to call it correctly.

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

Completeness3/5

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

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the return semantics; it does state that an AP2 artifact with execution_hash is exported, which is useful. However, the decision-function inputs are left opaque ('See the tool's manifest') and the output shape is only accessible via describe_tool, leaving meaningful gaps.

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 documents all four parameters including the compute enum. The description adds nothing beyond the schema for parameter meaning (policy_parameters field names are explicitly deferred to an external manifest), so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The name and title state the verb+resource (map ISO 20022 to EVM calldata), but the description body leads with infrastructure boilerplate ('OpenChainGraph compute node (compliance_mandate)') rather than explaining what the mapping produces. It references a downstream consumer ('Output feeds: art-291-screen-onledger-transfer-batch') but never describes the transformation itself, so an agent must infer purpose from the name.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to the many sibling mapping/lint tools (e.g. map_mt9xx_to_camt, validate_dtcc_ca_iso20022_message). The compute-mode discussion is about execution routing, not tool selection, so the agent is given no criteria for choosing this tool.

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

All AINumbers Fintech Intelligence Suite toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources