Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Veille MCP Server

Veille MCP Server

Official
by veilleio
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

VAT Validation

vat
Read-only

Validate European tax identification numbers against the VIES database to confirm validity and retrieve the registered company name and address.

Instructions

VAT Validation. Validate a European VAT number against the VIES database. Returns company name, registered address, and validity status for any EU member state. Credit cost: 1 credit per call.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "vat"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesThe VAT number to validate (e.g. FR40303265045).
fieldsNoComma-separated list of fields to keep in the response, with dot notation for nested fields (e.g. name,location.city). Does not change the credit cost.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds real context beyond that by naming the external VIES dependency, listing the returned data (company name, address, status) and disclosing a concrete credit cost of 1 per call. It omits failure modes such as VIES downtime or what an invalid number returns, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Three substantive sentences after the title restatement, all front-loaded with the action first and the cost last. The opening 'VAT Validation.' merely repeats the title and could be dropped, but nothing else is padded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With only two parameters and no output schema, the description does a reasonable job by describing return fields and cost, but it does not cover error behavior, result caching, or VIES reliability issues that matter for an external-registry lookup. Adequate rather than complete.

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%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds value with 'for any EU member state', which tells the agent that cross-country formats are accepted without transforming the input, and it flags the response fields the query produces. It still says nothing about what happens with malformed or non-EU numbers.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (validate) and resource (European VAT number) and names the authoritative source (VIES). It implicitly separates itself from vat_rates and vat_iban by dealing with VAT number validity rather than rates or bank-account checks, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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 by the phrase 'validate a European VAT number', and the credit cost gives a cost-aware signal, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to the sibling tools for rates or IBAN checks. An agent must infer the routing itself.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools