ifsc-mcp

List valid states, districts and branch names for a bank

branch_places

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find the exact state, district, and branch spellings accepted by bank branch searches. Use it when a search returns no rows to verify place names before retrying.

Instructions

Discover the exact district and branch-name spellings that search_branches matches on.

The branch search API matches city/district and branch verbatim, so a near-miss returns zero rows. This tool walks the same hierarchy the API uses, one level per call, and returns the accepted values at that level: bank_code alone -> states; add state -> districts; add district -> branches.

Returns ok: true with level ('states'|'districts'|'branches'), the values at that level, total found, truncated, and the echoed query.

Call this when a search returned nothing and you need to check spelling - it is cheaper than guessing several more search calls.

Args: bank_code: 4-letter bank code; required. state: ISO 3166-2 code to descend to districts, e.g. "IN-MH". district: District name to descend to branches, e.g. "MUMBAI". limit: Cap on returned values, 1-200 (default 200).

Returns: The place names valid at the requested level, or a structured error payload.

Example: Ask "which states does Kotak serve?" -> call branch_places(bank_code="KKBK").

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Cap on how many values to return, 1-200. Defaults to 200.
`state`	No	Pass an ISO 3166-2 code ('IN-MH') to move from the states level to the districts level. Omit it to get the list of states.
`district`	No	Pass a district name from the previous level (e.g. 'MUMBAI') to get the branch names inside it. Requires `state`.
`bank_code`	Yes	Required 4-letter bank code, e.g. 'HDFC'. The listed values are specific to this bank - a district HDFC operates in may not appear for another bank.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds the level-by-level traversal behavior (`bank_code` -> states, +`state` -> districts, +`district` -> branches) and notes truncation. This is meaningful added context beyond the annotations, though it is somewhat redundant with the separately documented output schema.

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?

Front-loads the purpose and the traversal model before args/returns, and each sentence carries weight. The Returns section duplicates what the output schema already provides, so it is slightly longer than strictly necessary.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no further explanation here. Between the description, schema, and annotations, an agent has everything needed to select and invoke this tool 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%, so every parameter is already documented, including the hierarchy semantics and the 'requires state' constraint. The description's Args section largely restates the same example values, adding little beyond the schema baseline.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Discover the exact district and branch-name spellings') and explicitly names the sibling it complements ('search_branches'), so an agent can distinguish it without opening schemas.

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?

It gives an explicit trigger condition ('Call this when a search returned nothing and you need to check spelling') and a rationale for preferring it over the alternative ('cheaper than guessing several more search calls'), effectively naming search_branches as the alternative path.

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

Deploy Server