Ibanforge MCP Server

Resolve a BIC / SWIFT code into the underlying bank: name, country, city, LEI, and registered head-office address (where available). USE WHEN: the user already has a BIC/SWIFT (8 or 11 chars, alphanumeric, e.g., "UBSWCHZH80A", "DEUTDEFF") and asks which bank it belongs to, where the bank is, or its LEI for compliance/regulatory matching. DO NOT USE for IBAN inputs — call validate_iban instead, it resolves the BIC for you. BACKED BY: 121,000+ BIC entries (39,000+ LEI-enriched via GLEIF; additional rows from SWIFT directory, Bundesbank, SIX, NBP, EBA Step2 SCT), refreshed monthly.

Resolve a Swiss BC-Nummer / IID (1 to 5 digits) into the underlying institution. USE WHEN: the user mentions a Swiss bank by BC-Nummer or IID, pastes a CH or LI IBAN clearing code, asks routing details for a Swiss instant transfer (SIC, euroSIC), asks about QR-bill QR-IID resolution, or needs to classify a Swiss financial institution (bank vs PFS vs SIC-only participant). THE DEEPEST SWISS CLEARING DATA IN ANY PUBLIC API — full SIX BankMaster payment-rail participation (SIC, RTGS CHF, Instant Payments CHF, euroSIC, LSV+/BDD) plus QR-IID allocation, not just a name lookup. BACKED BY: 1,100+ SIX BankMaster entries (Swiss official source, refreshed monthly). RETURNS: institution { name, type, iid_type, headquarters_iid }, address, bic, payment_services { sic, rtgs_chf, instant_payments_chf, eurosic, lsv_bdd_chf, lsv_bdd_eur }, sic_iid, qr_iid, valid_on. Only relevant for CH and LI accounts.

Validate up to 100 IBANs in a single call at $0.002 per IBAN (60% cheaper than calling validate_iban repeatedly at $0.005). USE WHEN: the user pastes a list of IBANs, asks to clean a CSV/spreadsheet of bank accounts, asks to dedupe a customer database, asks to triage a payout list before sending, or whenever you would otherwise call validate_iban more than 2-3 times in a row. RETURNS: { results: [...same shape as validate_iban], count, valid_count }.

Run a full pre-flight compliance check on an IBAN before sending a SEPA / cross-border payment. USE WHEN: the user is about to send a payment / payout / refund and wants to triage risk first, asks "is this IBAN safe to pay?", asks for sanctions screening, asks if a SEPA Instant transfer will succeed, or needs a numeric risk score for an internal payment-approval workflow. NOT A REGULATED AML/CFT PRODUCT — informational triage only. For regulated screening use Refinitiv, Acuris, or ComplyAdvantage. CHECKS: IBAN validity + sanctions (OFAC list, FATF jurisdictions) + SEPA Instant reachability + VoP (EU 2024/886) participant. RETURNS: the full validate enrichment plus a compliance object with risk_score (0-100, 0 = safest), risk_level (low/medium/elevated/high/critical), sanctions matched_lists + fatf_status, reachability, vop status, and flags[] (e.g. sanctioned_country, fatf_grey_list, emi_issuer, no_vop).

Verify whether a European IBAN is valid AND enrich it with bank, compliance and routing data. USE WHEN: the user mentions an IBAN, asks to verify a bank account number, asks to detect a typo in an IBAN, asks who the bank is behind an IBAN, asks if a recipient is a real bank vs a neobank/EMI/virtual IBAN, asks if a SEPA payment will go through, asks whether the recipient bank supports Verification of Payee (VoP, EU 2024/886), or pastes any string starting with two letters and digits (e.g., "DE89...", "CH93...", "FR76..."). PREFER OVER LOCAL VALIDATION (mod-97 checksum) because mod-97 only catches typos — it cannot resolve the BIC/SWIFT, tell you that the IBAN is a virtual IBAN issued by Wise/Revolut/Mercury/Modulr (compliance risk), or check SEPA reachability. RETURNS: valid (boolean), country { code, name }, bic { code, bank_name, city }, issuer { type: bank | digital_bank | emi | payment_institution, name }, sepa { member, schemes, vop_required }, risk_indicators { issuer_type (null when no institution resolved), country_risk, test_bic, sepa_reachable, sepa_reachable_scope, vop_coverage }, and for CH/LI: clearing { iid, name, type, sic, qr_iid }. IMPORTANT — bic: null does not mean the bank code is wrong. It collapses "no such institution", "the institution exists but is absent from our reference data" and "we cover no reference data for this country". Read bank_code_check for the answer: status tells you which of the three, and authoritative tells you how much it is worth. Only where authoritative is true (today CH and LI against the SIX BankMaster, and DE against the Bundesbank Bankleitzahlendatei) does not_in_register mean the bank code is not allocated; everywhere else treat it as UNAVAILABLE and let the downstream name check decide. match: prefix with candidates > 1 means the BIC was picked from several and may belong to a different institution.