Burs-IA Utils

Validar CURP (México)

mx-curp-validate

Read-onlyIdempotent

Valida una CURP mexicana (18 caracteres): estructura, fecha de nacimiento, sexo, entidad y dígito verificador RENAPO. Cuándo: hay que comprobar sin conexión un documento o número de cuenta de LatAm o España dado por un usuario antes de guardarlo o usarlo; la herramienta solo valida. No para: validar un RFC mexicano (mx-rfc-validate). 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: Validates a Mexican CURP (18 characters): structure, birth date, sex (H/M/X), state code, and the RENAPO check digit; returns valid/invalid and the decoded fields. When: a user-supplied Latin American or Spanish ID or account number has to be checked offline before it is stored or used; the tool only validates. Not for: validating a Mexican RFC (mx-rfc-validate). [EN completo / full EN: inputSchema.description]

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`curp`	Yes	CURP (string; required; up to 20 chars).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sex`	No
`state`	No
`valid`	No
`reason`	No
`birth_date`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 2, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / curp / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  "HEGG560427MVZRRL04"
+]
```

Changed1 schema field changedNov 1, 2026

addedInput schema / description

Added value: +"EN: Validates a Mexican CURP (18 characters): structure, birth date, sex (H/M/X), state code, and the RENAPO check digit; returns valid/invalid and the decoded fields. When: a user-supplied Latin American or Spanish ID or account number has to be checked offline before it is stored or used; the tool only validates. Not for: validating a Mexican RFC (mx-rfc-validate). 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

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, openWorld=false, idempotent, non-destructive), the description adds offline/no-network, no stored state, determinism, and hard limits (64 KB input, 1 s per call, 1 MB result). It also states the return shape (valid/invalid plus decoded fields), which is behavioral context annotations cannot convey.

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?

Labeled sections (Cuándo / No para / Efectos / Determinista / Límites) make it skimmable and front-loaded with purpose. It loses a point for repeating the entire English block already present in inputSchema.description, plus the pointer '[EN completo / full EN: inputSchema.description]'.

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?

With one required param, full schema coverage, an output schema, and rich annotations, the description fills every remaining gap: trigger conditions, exclusion, side effects, determinism, and size/time limits. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real semantics: the input is an 18-character CURP, and it is decoded into birth date, sex, and state code. Minor tension with the schema's maxLength of 20 is a small blemish, not a blocker.

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?

Specific verb plus resource (validate a Mexican CURP, 18 chars) with an enumeration of exactly what is checked: structure, birth date, sex, state code, RENAPO check digit. It also names the sibling it is not (mx-rfc-validate), so an agent can distinguish it without opening schemas.

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 'Cuándo' clause gives a concrete trigger (checking a user-supplied LatAm/Spanish ID offline before storing or using it) and states the tool only validates. The 'No para' clause explicitly routes RFC validation to mx-rfc-validate.

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?