Skip to main content
Glama

Server Details

Validate IBAN bank account numbers (format + mod-97 checksum). Returns whether the IBAN is valid.

Status
Healthy
Last Tested
Transport
Streamable HTTP
URL

Glama MCP Gateway

Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.

MCP client
Glama
MCP server

Full call logging

Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.

Tool access control

Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.

Managed credentials

Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.

Usage analytics

See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.

100% free. Your data is private.
Tool DescriptionsA

Average 3.6/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5

Seul un outil existe, donc aucune ambiguïté possible entre outils.

Naming Consistency5/5

Un seul outil, nommé de manière claire et cohérente avec son rôle.

Tool Count4/5

Le nombre d'un outil est approprié pour un validateur IBAN simple, mais pourrait être étendu (ex. génération, détection de pays).

Completeness4/5

L'outil couvre l'opération principale (validation) mais manque de fonctionnalités complémentaires (formatage, extraction BIC).

Available Tools

1 tool
valider_ibanAInspect

Vérifie si un numéro IBAN est valide (format + checksum mod-97).

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ibanYesLe numéro IBAN à vérifier, ex: BE68539007547034
Behavior3/5

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

The description discloses the checks performed (format + checksum mod-97) but does not reveal behavioral traits such as whether it makes external calls, logs data, or has rate limits. Annotations are empty, so the description carries the full burden, yet it is minimal.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the purpose. Every word is necessary; no wasted content.

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 is adequate. It could mention the return format or behavior on invalid input, but the core purpose is clear.

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 100% with a description and example for the only parameter. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. A score of 3 is appropriate as baseline.

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's purpose: validating an IBAN by checking format and mod-97 checksum. It uses a specific verb (Vérifie) and resource (numéro IBAN), and there are no sibling tools requiring differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Since there are no siblings, it's less critical, but the description lacks any context about appropriate usage or prerequisites.

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

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Try in Browser

Your Connectors

Sign in to create a connector for this server.

Resources