EU EORI Number Check

check_eori

Verify an EU trader's EORI number before shipping, invoicing or filing a customs declaration. Checks up to 10 EORI numbers (EU-27 and XI Northern Ireland) live against the European Commission's EORI validation service: valid or invalid, request date and, where the trader consented to publication, name and address. Malformed numbers are rejected free. GB EORIs are not covered. Use when customs paperwork or a shipment needs a confirmed EU EORI. $0.01 per call, USDC on Base (x402).

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": {
      "eori": "<eori>"
    },
    "name": "check_eori"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`eori`	Yes	One EORI number, or up to 10 separated by commas
`payment_signature`	No	x402 v2 PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header value. Omit to receive payment requirements.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With zero annotations the description carries the full burden and does well: it names the upstream source (European Commission EORI validation service), discloses that results are live rather than cached, states that malformed numbers are rejected at no charge, and gives the price ($0.01 per call, USDC on Base via x402). It does not cover rate limits, timeout behavior, or how partial failures are handled in a 10-number batch, which keeps it from a 5.

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 core action and scope, with the exclusion and pricing trailing in logical order; no sentence is redundant. Slightly dense in the middle sentence, which packs source, return fields, and consent caveat into one long clause, but nothing is padding.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields (valid/invalid status, request date, and name/address only where consent was given) — a consent caveat an agent could not infer otherwise. Coverage limits, cost, and payment handshake are all stated, so nothing essential to a correct call is 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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including the comma-separated batch format. The description adds context around the payment parameter by explaining the x402/USDC pricing model, but adds no syntax, formatting, or validation detail for the `eori` parameter beyond what the schema states. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource ("Verify an EU trader's EORI number"), the exact jurisdictional scope (EU-27 and XI Northern Ireland), the batch limit (up to 10), and an explicit exclusion ("GB EORIs are not covered"). An agent knows precisely what this tool does and does not validate 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 a concrete trigger context — "before shipping, invoicing or filing a customs declaration" — and restates it as "Use when customs paperwork or a shipment needs a confirmed EU EORI." The GB exclusion functions as a when-not rule, so the agent can route away from this tool for UK numbers even though no sibling exists.

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

All EU EORI Number Check 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?