Skip to main content
Glama

Vies Eu

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Check Vat

check_vat
Read-onlyIdempotent

Validate an EU VAT number against VIES. Returns whether the number is a valid/registered EU VAT registration, plus the registered name and address when the member state publishes them (many states return "---" or empty even for valid numbers). A false result means not registered/invalid. If the national service is temporarily down, userError is MS_UNAVAILABLE/MS_MAX_CONCURRENT_REQ etc. — treat that as "could not check", not "invalid".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
vatNumberYesThe VAT number WITHOUT the country prefix, e.g. "811569869". If you include the prefix (e.g. "DE811569869") it is stripped automatically.
countryCodeYes2-letter EU member-state code = the VAT prefix, e.g. "DE", "FR", "IT". Greece is "EL" (not "GR").

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "countryCode": "DE",
+    "vatNumber": "811569869"
+  },
+  {
+    "countryCode": "FR",
+    "vatNumber": "75123456789"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), the description discloses important behaviors: false results mean invalid, name/address may be returned as '---' even for valid numbers, and service unavailability errors (MS_UNAVAILABLE, etc.) should be interpreted as 'could not check', not 'invalid'. This adds crucial context for interpreting results.

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 three sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose, then adds essential caveats about result interpretation and error handling. Every sentence contributes value.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, return value semantics, edge cases (national service downtime), and data availability quirks. Given the simple two-parameter schema and no output schema, this is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema already provides comprehensive descriptions of both parameters, including examples, prefix-stripping behavior, and the Greece 'EL' nuance, covering 100% of parameters. The description itself adds no additional parameter details, so a baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: validating EU VAT numbers against VIES. It uses a specific verb ('Validate'), names the resource ('EU VAT number', 'VIES'), and distinguishes it from the listed sibling tools, none of which perform VAT validation.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear usage context: it's for validating EU VAT numbers. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the tool's unique purpose among siblings makes the use case self-evident. It also specifies the input format expectations indirectly through the schema.

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

All Vies Eu 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.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have heavily overlapping purposes: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta (explicitly identical to the stable router right now), ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research all route the same class of questions, making mis-selection easy. The six Polymarket tools (bet_research, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edges, polymarket_edge_tracker, polymarket_fill_risk, polymarket_kalshi_spread) also blur together around edge detection and arbitrage, further muddying tool boundaries.

Naming Consistency4/5

All 33 tools use consistent lowercase snake_case naming, and most follow a clear verb_noun pattern (check_vat, compare_entities, resolve_entity, unsubscribe). A handful of noun-style names (entity_profile, bet_research, polymarket_edges, recent_alerts) deviate from the verb-first pattern but are still predictable and readable.

Tool Count2/5

33 tools is beyond the 25+ threshold for a coherent set, and the scope is sprawling: universal data routing, prediction-market analytics, VAT validation, AI visibility, memory, subscriptions, npm dependency scanning, and feedback. While each sub-domain has reason to exist, bundling them all into one server creates a kitchen-sink feel with too many entry points.

Completeness3/5

The core data-routing domain is well covered: universal router, grounded mode, deep research, entity resolution, profiles, comparisons, change feeds, claim validation, and search-within. VAT has check + status, and memory/subscription lifecycles are complete. However, there is no standalone tool to fetch a raw pipeworx:// record that citations reference, and the extreme breadth means no single domain is exhaustively fleshed out.

Resources