iso20022-bank-profile-mcp

Get a clearing profile

get_profile

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the ISO 20022 clearing profile definition, including rule bodies, validation logic, XPath targets, and error severity. Use it to inspect market-practice rules for a specific clearing network.

Instructions

Return one clearing profile in full, including its rule bodies.

Purpose:
    Retrieve the complete definition of an ISO 20022 clearing profile,
    including rule bodies, validation logic, and metadata.

When to use:
    Use when inspecting the specific market-practice rules, XPath
    targets, or error severity configured for a specific clearing network.

When NOT to use:
    Do not use to discover available profile identifiers; use `list_profiles`
    first. Do not use to evaluate payloads; use `lint_payload`.

Behavioral transparency:
    - Deterministic: Given the same profile_id and entitlements, returns
      identical profile data.
    - External dependencies: None (local memory/registry).
    - Side effects: Pure read-only operation; modifies no state.
    - Error states: Returns an error object if profile_id is unknown
      or requires ungranted entitlements.

Args:
    profile_id: The clearing profile identifier.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`profile_id`	Yes	The profile to fetch (see list_profiles).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.0.2Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/destructive/openWorld, so lines like 'pure read-only operation; modifies no state' are redundant. However, the description adds genuinely new context beyond the annotations: determinism guarantees, no external dependencies, and the specific error states (unknown profile_id, missing entitlements). That is useful disclosure, though partly padded with annotation restatement.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Front-loaded opening sentence is good, but the 'Purpose' paragraph largely repeats it, the 'Behavioral transparency' bullets restate annotations, and the Args line duplicates a 100%-covered schema field. Several sentences do not earn their place, though the sectioned layout remains scannable.

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 an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, and it covers purpose, routing, prerequisites, and error behavior. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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% and the single parameter is documented there ('The profile to fetch (see list_profiles)'). The description's Args section restates the identifier without adding format, naming convention, or lookup syntax, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 opening sentence names a specific verb and resource ('Return one clearing profile in full, including its rule bodies') and the Purpose section clarifies scope (rule bodies, validation logic, metadata). An agent can distinguish this from list_profiles and lint_payload without opening the 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?

Explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections name both conditions and the alternative tools (list_profiles for discovery, lint_payload for evaluation). Routing is unambiguous.

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

Deploy Server