IBANforge

Lookup BIC/SWIFT

lookup_bic

Read-onlyIdempotent

Identify the bank behind any BIC/SWIFT code: returns bank name, country, city, LEI, and head-office address for compliance and regulatory matching.

Instructions

Resolve a BIC / SWIFT code into the underlying bank: name, country, city, LEI, and registered head-office address (where available). USE WHEN: the user already has a BIC/SWIFT (8 or 11 chars, alphanumeric, e.g., "UBSWCHZH80A", "DEUTDEFF") and asks which bank it belongs to, where the bank is, or its LEI for compliance/regulatory matching. DO NOT USE for IBAN inputs — call validate_iban instead, it resolves the BIC for you. BACKED BY: a BIC directory of GLEIF and national registers, refreshed monthly, plus a public copy of the SWIFT directory frozen in January 2018 that still makes up most of the rows; only the GLEIF rows carry an LEI. Live counts: https://api.ibanforge.com/llms.txt. RETURNS: bank_name, country, country_name, city, lei, address (if available). COST: 0.003 USDC.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`bic`	Yes	BIC / SWIFT code, 8 or 11 alphanumeric characters. Example: "UBSWCHZH80A" (UBS Switzerland) or "DEUTDEFF" (Deutsche Bank Frankfurt).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`bic`	Yes	Echo of the input, normalized to uppercase.
`lei`	No	Legal Entity Identifier (ISO 17442); null when none is on file.
`bic8`	No	8-char form (institution-level).
`city`	No
`bic11`	No	11-char form including branch.
`found`	Yes
`address`	No	Registered head-office address (GLEIF). null when the BIC carries no LEI or address.
`country`	No
`institution`	No	Bank legal name. null when the BIC is not found.
`valid_format`	Yes
`address_available`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed13 schema fields changedv1.8.0Sep 26, 2026

changedOutput schema / description

Previous value: -"BIC/SWIFT lookup result from the GLEIF database."New value: +"BIC/SWIFT lookup result from the BIC directory (GLEIF, national registers and a public copy of the SWIFT directory)."

changedOutput schema / properties / address / description

Previous value: -"Registered head-office address object (present when available)."New value: +"Registered head-office address (GLEIF). null when the BIC carries no LEI or address."

changedOutput schema / properties / address / properties / as_of / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
changedOutput schema / properties / address / properties / city / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
changedOutput schema / properties / address / properties / post_code / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
changedOutput schema / properties / address / properties / region / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
changedOutput schema / properties / address / properties / street / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

changedOutput schema / properties / address / type

Previous value: -"object"New value: +[
+  "object",
+  "null"
+]

changedOutput schema / properties / city / type

Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]

changedOutput schema / properties / institution / description

Previous value: -"Bank legal name."New value: +"Bank legal name. null when the BIC is not found."

changedOutput schema / properties / institution / type

Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]

changedOutput schema / properties / lei / description

Previous value: -"Legal Entity Identifier (ISO 17442) if available."New value: +"Legal Entity Identifier (ISO 17442); null when none is on file."

changedOutput schema / properties / lei / type

Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]

Changed4 schema fields changedv1.4.4Sep 2, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / address / description

Added value: +"Registered head-office address object (present when available)."

addedOutput schema / properties / address / properties

Added value: +{
+  "as_of": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "city": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "country": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "post_code": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "region": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "source": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "street": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": {
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / address / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +"object"
```
addedOutput schema / properties / address_available
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```

Addedv1.2.2Apr 30, 2026
Removedv1.2.1Apr 30, 2026
Addedv1.2.0Apr 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond annotations: data source provenance (GLEIF + national registers), the January 2018 SWIFT directory caveat, that only GLEIF rows carry an LEI, monthly refresh, and a cost. This is high-value behavioral transparency.

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?

The description is longer than minimal but well-structured with labeled sections (USE WHEN, DO NOT USE, BACKED BY, RETURNS, COST). It front-loads the core purpose and keeps each section purposeful. The live counts link and cost are slightly extra but useful for agent decision-making.

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?

Given the simple one-parameter schema, rich annotations, output schema, and clear sibling context, the description covers everything an agent needs: what it does, when to use it, when not to use it, important data caveats, and return fields. No critical gaps.

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 coverage is 100% and the input schema already describes the BIC parameter with format and examples. The description repeats the format and examples but does not add significant new meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Resolve') with a clear resource ('BIC/SWIFT code') and states the output fields (bank name, country, city, LEI, address). It clearly distinguishes itself from validate_iban by explicitly saying it is not for IBAN inputs.

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 explicit USE WHEN conditions (user has a BIC/SWIFT, asks which bank, location, or LEI) and an explicit DO NOT USE for IBAN with the named alternative 'validate_iban'. This is ideal routing guidance.

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

Deploy Server