camt053-mcp

Get required input fields

get_required_fields

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the mandatory column names for a given camt.05x message type as a checklist before building reversing-entry records.

Instructions

List only the required input field names for a camt message type.

Use this for a quick checklist of the mandatory columns before building
reversing-entry records. When you need full type/format constraints (not
just which fields are required), call ``get_input_schema`` instead.

Args:
    message_type: A supported ISO 20022 camt.05x message type.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "message_type": "<message_type>"
    },
    "name": "get_required_fields"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`message_type`	Yes	A supported ISO 20022 camt.05x message type string. Must be exactly one of: 'camt.052.001.14', 'camt.053.001.14', 'camt.054.001.14' (see list_message_types).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedJul 14, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / message_type / description

Previous value: -"A supported ISO 20022 camt.05x message type string, e.g. 'camt.053.001.14'. Call list_message_types first to discover the exact accepted values."New value: +"A supported ISO 20022 camt.05x message type string. Must be exactly one of: 'camt.052.001.14', 'camt.053.001.14', 'camt.054.001.14' (see list_message_types)."

addedInput schema / properties / message_type / enum

Added value: +[
+  "camt.052.001.14",
+  "camt.053.001.14",
+  "camt.054.001.14"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedv0.0.12Jul 10, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / message_type / description

Added value: +"A supported ISO 20022 camt.05x message type string, e.g. 'camt.053.001.14'. Call list_message_types first to discover the exact accepted values."

First observedv0.0.11Jul 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the behavioral safety is clear. The description adds context about returning only field names, which is transparent. No contradictions.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is concise: two sentences plus a pointer to the alternative tool. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every sentence serves a purpose.

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 tool's low complexity (1 parameter with full enum, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, usage, and alternatives completely. No gaps remain.

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% with a detailed enum description. The description adds the usage purpose (for building reversing-entry records) but essentially restates the parameter type. This provides marginal added value beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool lists required input field names for a camt message type. It distinguishes from the sibling get_input_schema by explaining the difference, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 description explicitly tells when to use this tool (quick checklist for reversing-entry records) and when to use the alternative get_input_schema (for full type/format constraints). This gives clear guidance to the AI agent.

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