IranTools (paid)

iran_province

Origin URL: https://irantools.johnaio281.workers.dev Origin hostname: irantools.johnaio281.workers.dev Origin brand: IranTools - paid MCP server for AI agents Provider aliases: Iran province lookup, Ostan directory Family key: irantools.johnaio281.workers.dev::iran Endpoint: POST /api/iran/iran_province Summary: Look up an Iranian province by Persian or English name and return its code, capital and region. Keyword: iranian province Keyword: ostan Keyword: province lookup Keyword: capital city iran Keyword: 31 provinces Use case: find the code and capital of Khuzestan province Use case: look up an Iranian province by its English name Use case: list the regions of Iran Source description: Look up an Iranian province by Persian or English name and return its code, capital and region. Auth mode: paid

Price: $0.003 per call (USDC on Base via x402, or USDC on Tempo via MPP).

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "iran_province"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the auth mode (paid) and price ($0.003/call), which is genuinely behavioural context, but says nothing about name matching semantics (exact vs fuzzy, case sensitivity, Persian vs transliteration) or failure behavior for unknown provinces.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The actual purpose sentence is one line buried after origin URL, hostname, brand, provider aliases and family key. Keyword and use-case lists repeat the summary instead of adding information, so much of the text does not earn its place.

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 one-parameter lookup with no output schema, stating the return fields (code, capital, region) and the accepted name forms covers most of what an agent needs. Only the matching semantics and the direct contrast with iran_provinces_list are missing.

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 coverage is 0% and the single 'name' parameter is a bare untyped string in the schema. The description partially compensates by saying the name may be Persian or English, but gives no guidance on accepted spellings, transliteration, or whether partial names match.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: look up an Iranian province by Persian or English name and return its code, capital and region. However, one use case ('list the regions of Iran') blurs the boundary with the sibling iran_provinces_list, so it is not fully differentiated.

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?

Three use cases give implied usage context, which is more than nothing. But there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of iran_provinces_list for enumerating all 31 provinces, an obvious alternative an agent would need to choose between.

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

All IranTools (paid) 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?