VAT.SUPPORT

vida_mandate_check

Determine EU VAT in the Digital Age (ViDA) and statutory B2B e-invoicing mandates, implementation phases (P1–P5), platform economy deemed-supplier rules, and digital reporting deadlines.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "vida_mandate_check"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`language`	No	Response language: en, ru, es, zh-CN
`is_platform`	No	Whether the business operates an online digital platform or intermediation service
`business_type`	No	Primary business model
`cross_border_b2b`	No	Whether the business engages in cross-border B2B sales within the EU (triggers mandatory e-invoicing & real-time digital reporting)
`passenger_transport`	No	Whether the platform facilitates road or passenger transport
`short_term_accommodation`	No	Whether the platform facilitates short-term property/room rentals

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the substantive dimensions the answer covers (phases, deemed-supplier rules, deadlines). However, it says nothing about whether the result is advisory guidance versus a definitive determination, where the underlying rules come from, or how an empty/partial profile is handled.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the enumerated topics are all substantive rather than padding. Length is appropriate for a policy-determination tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With six parameters, zero required fields, no annotations, and no output schema, the definition leaves an important behavior unexplained: what the tool returns when only some or none of the profile flags are supplied. The topical scope is covered, but the invocation semantics for a fully optional parameter set are not.

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%, so each of the six parameters is already explained, including the cross_border_b2b trigger and the platform-facilitation flags. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, which is the baseline-3 case when the schema does the work.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Determine') and names a concrete subject area: ViDA, B2B e-invoicing mandates, P1–P5 phases, platform deemed-supplier rules, and digital reporting deadlines. That is enough for an agent to know this is a ViDA/e-invoicing applicability tool rather than a rate or registration lookup, but it never positions itself against obvious siblings such as vat_compliance_full or vat_registration_check.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of the sibling tools whose scope overlaps (vat_compliance_full in particular). The agent must infer from the parameter names that it supplies a business profile to get an applicability determination.

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

All VAT.SUPPORT tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.