GadgetHumans API Hub

iban_validate

Validate an IBAN checksum and return the country, bank code, account number and formatted groups. Pure CPU, instant. Use before storing or paying to an IBAN.

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": {
      "iban": "<iban>"
    },
    "name": "iban_validate"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`iban`	Yes	IBAN to validate

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 8, 2026
RemovedNov 6, 2026

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 3, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / iban

Added value: +{
+  "description": "IBAN to validate",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "iban"
+]
```

AddedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the operation is pure CPU and instant, and it lists the data returned, but it does not say how invalid IBANs are reported or whether any error format is used.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and result. Every sentence adds useful information with no 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?

For a simple one-parameter, read-only utility, the description covers input purpose, returned fields, performance, and usage timing. The main missing piece is failure behavior for invalid IBANs, which matters but is less critical here.

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?

The single parameter has 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already explains it. The description adds the validation context but no additional syntax, formatting, or input constraints beyond what the schema provides.

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 names a specific verb and resource: validate an IBAN checksum. It also states the concrete fields returned (country, bank code, account number, formatted groups), which lets an agent distinguish it from siblings like vat_validate or eu_vat.

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?

It gives clear when-to-use guidance: "Use before storing or paying to an IBAN." However, it does not name alternatives or state when not to use it, such as for VAT or other identifier validation.

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

All GadgetHumans API Hub tools Inspect

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.