Skip to main content
Glama

Creditcard

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Validate Card

validate_card
Read-onlyIdempotent

Validate a credit/debit card number (keyless, offline): Luhn (mod-10) checksum, detected card network (Visa/Mastercard/Amex/Discover/JCB/Diners/UnionPay/Maestro), and whether the length is valid for that network. Spaces/dashes are ignored. NOTE: this checks the number is well-formed — it does NOT verify the card is real/active/funded (that needs a payment processor).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
numberYesThe card number, e.g. "4111 1111 1111 1111".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "number": "4111 1111 1111 1111"
+  },
+  {
+    "number": "5500005555555559"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context: it ignores spaces/dashes, performs multiple checks, and clearly states what it does NOT do, complementing annotations perfectly.

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?

Two sentences plus a note; every sentence provides distinct, useful information without redundancy or fluff.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers all essential behavioral aspects, limitations, and input format, making it complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 100% schema description coverage and a single parameter, the description adds format notes and examples, enriching the schema's minimal description.

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 a credit/debit card number using Luhn checksum, detects network, and checks length validity. It distinguishes from similar tools by specifying these multiple checks and explicitly noting it does not verify realness.

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?

The description explicitly tells when to use this tool (for format validation) and when not to (for real/active/funded verification). It also mentions it's keyless and offline, aiding in context selection.

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

All Creditcard 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.

Resources