Skip to main content
Glama

ShippingRates MCP Server (Apify)

by actor.apify.vinaybhosle--shippingrates-mcp

Vessel Schedule Options With Cutoffs

shippingrates_vessel_schedule_options
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get carrier vessel/voyage schedule options between an origin and destination, including operational cutoff deadlines when the carrier source publishes them.

Use this for booking planning questions that need vessel details, voyage number, transshipment ports, ETA/ETD, and port/SI/VGM cutoffs. Missing cutoff fields remain null or absent; ShippingRates does not infer unpublished deadlines.

For port-call monitoring without cutoff details, use shippingrates_vessel_schedule.

PAID: $0.03/call via x402 (USDC on Base or Solana). Without payment, returns 402 with payment instructions.

Returns: { origin, destination, options: Array<{ carrier, vessel_name, vessel_imo, voyage_number, etd, eta, transshipment_ports, cutoffs, source_url }>, coverage }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum schedule options to return (default: 50)
originYesOrigin UN/LOCODE — e.g. CNSHA, INNSA, SGSIN
carrierNoOptional carrier filter — e.g. cmacgm, hapag, maersk
x_paymentNox402 payment proof header
days_aheadNoDays to look ahead (default: 90)
destinationYesDestination UN/LOCODE — e.g. USLAX, DEHAM, AEJEA

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly and idempotent. Description adds critical context: missing cutoffs remain null (no inference), payment requirement ($0.03/call) and 402 error handling. No contradictions.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Concise, front-loaded with purpose, then usage, payment, and return format. Every sentence adds value; no redundancy.

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?

Despite missing output schema, description provides a detailed return structure. Also covers error behavior and payment context, fully addressing the tool's usage requirements.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so parameters are well-documented. Description adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves vessel/voyage schedule options with cutoffs, using specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from the sibling tool shippingrates_vessel_schedule which lacks cutoff details.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'for booking planning questions that need vessel details...cutoffs.' Also provides clear alternative: 'For port-call monitoring without cutoff details, use shippingrates_vessel_schedule.'

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

All ShippingRates MCP Server (Apify) toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

All 26 tools have clearly distinct purposes, with detailed descriptions that differentiate overlapping areas (e.g., transit vs. schedule vs. vessel schedule). Even closely related tools like dd_calculate, dd_compare, and dd_countdown are well-delineated.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case pattern with prefix 'shippingrates_'. Compound names use underscores predictably (e.g., dd_calculate, inland_compare, vessel_schedule_options), making the naming scheme highly predictable.

Tool Count4/5

26 tools is slightly above the ideal range, but the breadth of features (rates, D&D, inland, congestion, risk, schedules, etc.) justifies the count. Each tool earns its place, and there is minimal bloat.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers all major aspects of shipping intelligence: rates, surcharges, local charges, D&D, inland haulage, congestion, risk, transit, schedules, regulatory updates, and discovery tools. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose.

Resources