PESEL/NIP/REGON Validator

pesel_validate

Validates the checksum of an 11-digit Polish national identification number (PESEL). Checksum uses weights 1 3 7 9 1 3 7 9 1 3 over the first 10 digits; control digit is (10 - sum mod 10) mod 10. On success also decodes the date of birth and sex embedded in the number; a checksum-valid number with an impossible calendar date (e.g. Feb 30) is still reported invalid.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "pesel_validate"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`value`	Yes	digits-only identifier to validate (no spaces or dashes)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sex`	No
`valid`	Yes
`reason`	No
`birthDate`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedAug 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the checksum algorithm, date-of-birth and sex decoding on success, and the special invalid-date condition. However, it omits other behavioral aspects like what happens with incorrect length or non-digit inputs, or whether it checks real assignment.

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 relatively concise—one dense sentence covering purpose, algorithm, and outcomes. It could be improved by splitting into shorter sentences for readability, but it wastes no words and front-loads the core function.

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 it has only one parameter and an output schema (implied by mention of decoded data), the description covers validation logic, success behavior, and an edge case (invalid date). It is missing details on input length validation and what errors are returned for malformed inputs.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema parameter description states 'digits-only identifier'. The tool description enriches this by specifying the context (Polish national ID), required length (11 digits), and the exact validation logic, adding significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 explicitly names the resource (PESEL) and action (validates checksum), specifies it's an 11-digit Polish national ID, and details the algorithm. This clearly distinguishes from siblings (nip_validate, regon_validate) by function and context.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies use for PESEL numbers, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools for NIP or REGON. No when-not conditions or alternatives are mentioned.

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

All PESEL/NIP/REGON Validator tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?