Skip to main content
Glama

generate

Read-onlyIdempotent

Generate validated ISO 20022 XML messages from record data for pain, pacs, and acmt families; camt families return an error.

Instructions

Generate a validated ISO 20022 XML message from records; the XML document is returned in the 'xml' key. Supported for initiation and interbank families (pain, pacs, acmt); statement families (camt) are inbound-only and return an explanatory error. On failure the 'error' value lists every missing or invalid field at once — fix them all and retry once.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
recordsYesList of flat record objects (field name → value). Field names come from the family's input schema — call describe(message_type) for the required fields. For pain.001 credit transfers the key fields are: id, date ('YYYY-MM-DD' accepted), initiator_name, payment_id, requested_execution_date ('YYYY-MM-DD'), debtor_name, debtor_account_IBAN, debtor_agent_BIC, creditor_name, creditor_account_IBAN, creditor_agent_BIC, payment_amount (alias 'amount'), currency (alias 'payment_currency'), remittance_information; batch_booking takes JSON true/false, and nb_of_txs/ctrl_sum are computed automatically. IBAN and BIC values are strictly validated, never coerced.
message_typeYesISO 20022 message type, e.g. 'pain.001.001.09', 'pacs.008' or 'camt.053'. For pain messages a fully-versioned type is preferred; the bare family name 'pain.001' resolves to 'pain.001.001.09'.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior4/5

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

Description adds context beyond annotations: error behavior (lists all missing/invalid fields, retry once), family support with explanatory error for camt. No contradiction with readOnlyHint=true (generation is a pure computation).

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?

Two well-structured sentences, front-loading the main action and return key. No wasted words, though could benefit from breaks for readability.

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?

Covers all key aspects: what it does, input format (records, message_type), output format (xml key, error key), supported families, error handling, and retry policy. Complete for a generation tool with validation.

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%, but description adds significant detail for 'records' parameter with field examples, validation notes (IBAN/BIC strictly validated), and automatic computation of nb_of_txs/ctrl_sum. Also explains message_type version resolution.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Generate' and resource 'validated ISO 20022 XML message', and distinguishes from sibling tools like validate and parse by focusing on creation. It also specifies supported families (pain, pacs, acmt) and restrictions (camt inbound-only).

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied from the purpose, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over siblings (e.g., validate, parse). No when-not or alternative suggestions provided.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/sebastienrousseau/iso20022-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server