Burs-IA Utils

¿IP dentro de rangos CIDR?

cidr-contains

Read-onlyIdempotent

Verifica si una IP está dentro de alguno de varios bloques CIDR (p. ej. una lista permitida). Cuándo: hay que leer, construir o revisar con exactitud una URL, una cabecera HTTP, un token, una versión, un rango de IP, un documento HTML o Markdown o un archivo para agentes. No para: convertir un rango de IPs inicio-fin en la lista mínima de bloques CIDR que lo cubre (ip-range-to-cidrs). Efectos secundarios: ninguno (solo lectura, sin red, sin estado guardado). Determinista: la misma entrada da la misma salida. Límites: entrada JSON de hasta 64 KB, 1 s por llamada, resultado de hasta 1 MB.

EN: Checks whether an IP address falls inside any of a list of CIDR blocks (IPv4/IPv6, e.g. an allowlist) and lists which ones match. When: a URL, HTTP header, token, version string, IP range, HTML or Markdown document or agent-readiness file has to be parsed, built or checked exactly. Not for: converting an inclusive start-end IP range (ip-range-to-cidrs). [EN completo / full EN: inputSchema.description]

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ip`	Yes	IP address (string; required; up to 64 chars).
`cidrs`	Yes	CIDR blocks (array of string; required; at least 1 items).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`matches`	No
`contained`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 2, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / cidrs / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  [
+    "192.168.0.0/16",
+    "10.0.0.0/8"
+  ]
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / ip / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  "10.1.2.3"
+]
```

Changed1 schema field changedNov 1, 2026

addedInput schema / description

Added value: +"EN: Checks whether an IP address falls inside any of a list of CIDR blocks (IPv4/IPv6, e.g. an allowlist) and lists which ones match. When: a URL, HTTP header, token, version string, IP range, HTML or Markdown document or agent-readiness file has to be parsed, built or checked exactly. Not for: converting an inclusive start-end IP range (ip-range-to-cidrs). Side effects: none (read-only, no network access, no stored state). Deterministic: the same input gives the same output. Limits: JSON input up to 64 KB, 1 s per call, result up to 1 MB."

First observedNov 1, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description still adds real value beyond them by stating that there is no network access or stored state, that the operation is deterministic, and by giving concrete limits: 64 KB input, 1 s per call, and 1 MB result.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is stated up front and is clear, but the text is duplicated in Spanish and English, which nearly doubles the length. On top of that, the generic "When" enumeration about URLs, headers, tokens, and documents is padding that does not help an agent decide whether to call this tool.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so it need not describe the shape of return values; rich annotations cover the safety profile; and the limits plus the determinism note round out what is missing. The only real gap is precise semantics for malformed IP addresses or CIDRs, such as whether they error out or are skipped.

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%, and both parameters are documented with types and examples, so the schema already carries the weight. The description adds only that IPv4 and IPv6 are supported and that the input can be an allowlist-style collection; it gives no syntax rules or edge-case handling for the CIDR strings themselves.

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: checks whether an IP falls inside any of a list of CIDR blocks and lists which ones match. That is enough to distinguish it from siblings such as cidr-info, cidr-split, and ip-range-to-cidrs without opening any schema.

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 "No para" line explicitly excludes ip-range-to-cidrs, and the description names that sibling, so the agent has a real routing signal. The "Cuándo" list, however, is generic boilerplate about URLs, tokens, and HTML/Markdown documents that has little to do with CIDR containment, so it weakens the guidance instead of sharpening it.

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

All Burs-IA Utils tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?