Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

hexadata-tools

by io.github.4robot
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Validate tax ID (RFC, NIF, CUIT, RUT, NIT, CNPJ, UK VAT, EIN, P.IVA, SIREN, USt-IdNr, RUC, BN, ABN, GSTIN)

validate_tax_id

Use this when you need to check that a company or taxpayer identifier is well-formed and its check digit is correct before invoicing, onboarding a supplier or storing it. Deterministic and offline: returns valid, normalized/formatted form, entity type (company/person) and the reason when invalid. Supported countries: MX, ES, AR, CL, CO, BR, GB, US, IT, FR, DE, PE, CA, AU, IN (MX RFC, ES NIF/CIF/NIE, AR CUIT/CUIL, CL RUT, CO NIT, BR CNPJ/CPF, GB VAT number, US EIN, IT Partita IVA / Codice Fiscale, FR SIREN/SIRET/TVA, DE USt-IdNr / Steuer-ID, PE RUC, CA Business Number, AU ABN/ACN, IN GSTIN). It does NOT query any registry; for EU VAT registration status call validate_vat_eu. Other countries return UNSUPPORTED_COUNTRY without charge.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "validate_tax_id"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsNoBatch mode: up to 500 items, each with the same fields as a single call. Omit when validating a single value through the top-level fields.
taxIdNoThe identifier as written on the invoice or form, e.g. "EKU9003173C9", "B-12345674", "20-12345678-6", "12.345.678-5", "800.197.268-4", "11.222.333/0001-81", "GB123456782", "12-3456789", "IT00743110157", "FR40303265045", "552 032 534", "DE136695976", "20131312955", "123456782RC0001", "51 824 753 556", "27AAPFU0939F1ZV".
countryNoISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code of the tax ID, e.g. "MX", "ES", "BR", "GB", "IT", "FR", "DE", "PE", "CA", "AU", "IN". "UK" is accepted as an alias of "GB".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: deterministic and offline execution, no registry lookup, no charge for unsupported countries, and an explicit account of what is returned (valid flag, normalized form, entity type, invalid reason). It stops short of stating rate limits, batch billing semantics, or error behavior beyond the unsupported-country case, so it is not fully exhaustive.

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?

Front-loaded with the use case, then behavior, then scope, then the sibling alternative — a sensible ordering. The exhaustive country/ID-type list partially duplicates the title's enumeration, which is the only real waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, yet the description explains the return payload (valid, normalized form, entity type, invalid reason), plus the unsupported-country response and the fact that no registry is queried. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is already 100% (taxId examples, country ISO codes, batch mode up to 500 items). The description still adds value by enumerating the supported country set and per-country ID types, which tells an agent which country codes will actually work rather than just the format of the field.

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?

States the specific verb and resource (check a company/taxpayer identifier is well-formed with a correct check digit), enumerates the ID types and countries covered, and explicitly distinguishes itself from validate_vat_eu. An agent can separate it from every listed sibling without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives the trigger condition ('before invoicing, onboarding a supplier or storing it'), an explicit exclusion ('does NOT query any registry; for EU VAT registration status call validate_vat_eu'), and the out-of-scope behavior ('Other countries return UNSUPPORTED_COUNTRY without charge'). The alternative tool is named with the condition that selects it.

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

All hexadata-tools toolsInspect
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