Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Burs-IA Utils

by io.github.soyeladice-svg
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Validar RFC (México)

mx-rfc-validate
Read-onlyIdempotent

Valida un RFC mexicano (SAT): 13 caracteres persona física o 12 moral, fecha y dígito verificador mod 11. 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 una CURP mexicana (mx-curp-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 RFC (SAT taxpayer ID): 13 characters for individuals or 12 for companies, embedded date, and the SAT mod-11 check digit (homoclave last character). Returns valid/invalid only. 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 CURP (mx-curp-validate). [EN completo / full EN: inputSchema.description]

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rfcYesRFC (string; required; up to 20 chars).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNo
validNo
reasonNo
genericNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / rfc / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "GODE561231GR8"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / description
      Added value: +"EN: Validates a Mexican RFC (SAT taxpayer ID): 13 characters for individuals or 12 for companies, embedded date, and the SAT mod-11 check digit (homoclave last character). Returns valid/invalid only. 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 CURP (mx-curp-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."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint=false, but the description goes further: no network access, no stored state, deterministic output, and concrete limits (64 KB input, 1 s per call, 1 MB result). These operational constraints are not derivable from the annotations and materially affect how an agent batches or retries calls.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then cleanly segmented into When / Not for / Side effects / Deterministic / Limits. Slightly bloated by the bilingual ES+EN duplication and the trailing pointer to inputSchema.description, but every section carries information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, yet the description still notes it returns valid/invalid only. For a single-parameter, read-only validator, nothing an agent needs 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% and the single parameter is documented, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real meaning beyond the schema's bare 'up to 20 chars' by explaining the expected RFC structure (13 chars individual / 12 company, embedded date, mod-11 homoclave), which helps the agent pre-validate input.

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 ('Valida un RFC mexicano (SAT)') and immediately pins down the exact validation rules (13/12 chars, embedded date, mod-11 check digit). It explicitly names the sibling it is not (mx-curp-validate), so an agent can distinguish it without opening either schema.

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?

Provides an explicit 'Cuándo/When' clause (offline check of a user-supplied LatAm/Spanish ID before storing or using it) and an explicit 'No para/Not for' exclusion pointing to mx-curp-validate. Both the positive trigger and the alternative are named.

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 toolsInspect
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