Skip to main content
Glama

Temsor API — Turkey & EU business data

by com.temsor

ISIN Validation

isin_validate

Validates an ISIN (ISO 6166): country code, national identifier and the letter-aware check digit.

Portfolio imports and corporate-action files fail on a single mistyped ISIN. The check digit is a Luhn variant that first expands letters to two digits (A=10…Z=35), so a swapped letter is caught, not just a swapped digit. XS (international), EU and other reserved prefixes are accepted as country codes even though they are not ISO 3166 territories. A valid ISIN is self-consistent. It is not proof the security exists, is listed, or is the one you meant.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
isinYesISIN, 12 characters, e.g. US0378331005.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Despite no annotations, the description elaborates on the validation algorithm (Luhn variant with letter expansion), which explains why swapped letters are caught, and clarifies that a valid ISIN does not prove security existence. This gives meaningful insight into the tool's behavior and limitations.

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?

The description is concise and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by contextual examples and caveats. Each sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 validation tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the algorithm, accepted country code exceptions, and a clear caveat about interpretation. It does not explicitly state return values, but given the low complexity and typical validation semantics, the description is nearly complete.

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 schema fully covers the single parameter with length and example. The description adds context about what the validation checks (country code, national identifier, check digit) but does not provide additional parameter-specific semantics beyond that. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool validates an ISIN per ISO 6166, specifying the three components checked (country code, national identifier, check digit). This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling validators like iban_validate or bic_validate.

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?

The description provides contextual when-to-use guidance via the portfolio/corporate-action failure scenario and explains edge cases (XS/EU prefixes). It does not explicitly name alternatives but identifies the tool's unique behavior and limitations, giving clear context for usage.

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

All Temsor API — Turkey & EU business data toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes (e.g., bic_validate vs vin_validate), but there is notable overlap: tr_validate bundles Turkish validations that are also covered individually by iban_validate and tin_validate. Also, lei_validate and lei_lookup are closely related but distinct enough. Overall, agents can usually pick the right tool, but a few pairs could confuse.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names are consistently snake_case with predominately verb_noun patterns (e.g., validate, lookup, screen, parse, build). Some nouns like mcp_index, model_archive, and series_history break the verb pattern but are still predictable. Minor deviations from the noun_verb form (tr_invoice_build, shipping_identify) don't cause confusion. Very readable and consistent overall.

Tool Count3/5

With 27 tools, the set is heavy, exceeding the typical 3–15 well-scoped range. However, the server covers a broad domain: international standards validation, Turkey-specific business data (fuel, labor, invoices, addresses), and even MCP/LLM model archives. The count is justifiable given the scope, but it stretches coherence and may overwhelm agents.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface is remarkably comprehensive for the stated Turkey & EU business data purpose: validators for most ID types, VAT, IBAN, phone, VIN, sanctions; plus Turkey-specific operations like invoice build/parse, labor calculations, fuel prices, business days, and address parsing. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no general exchange-rate conversion, no credit-note-specific builder), but agents can accomplish core workflows without dead ends.

Resources