ScorpTech x402 Tools

Container Check

container_check

Read-onlyIdempotent

ISO 6346 container check digit. Four letters (the fourth is U, J, Z or R), six serial digits and a check digit. Letter values skip every multiple of 11, then each value is multiplied by 2 to the power of its position. The total mod 11 mod 10 is the check digit. Spaces are ignored. This does not look the owner up at BIC. Price: $0.001 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: GET https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/container-check

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": "container_check"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`value`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, and the description adds important context: pricing, x402/Solana payment, an HTTPS alternative, space normalization, and the BIC lookup limitation. It still omits error behavior and return-value semantics.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and input format, and the pricing and endpoint details are useful. The algorithm explanation is somewhat over-detailed for an agent invoking the tool and keeps it from being maximally concise.

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 validator with rich annotations, the description is largely complete: it covers format, normalization, cost, and scope. The main gap is that with no output schema, it does not describe what the tool returns or how invalid inputs are handled.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It does so effectively by specifying the four-letter/six-digit/check-digit format and noting that spaces are ignored, though it does not mention the parameter name, max length, case handling, or hyphen behavior.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names a specific standard and resource: an ISO 6346 container check digit. It explains the input shape and scope, but it does not explicitly direct the agent away from sibling validation tools such as ean_validate or vin_decode.

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?

Usage is implied by the detailed ISO 6346 format, and the note that it does not look the owner up at BIC provides a useful scope exclusion. However, it does not say when to use this tool versus related validation tools or define explicit preconditions.

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

All ScorpTech x402 Tools 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.

Resources

Need Help?