GoVisit MCP

Get related places

list_related_places

Read-only

Find nearby suggestions shown on a single place profile. Use the path of the reference place and filter its nearby cards by published details. Returns up to 20 matches.

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": {
      "pagePath": "<pagePath>"
    },
    "name": "list_related_places"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Optional published place name or partial name.
`limit`	No	Maximum number of results to return.
`audience`	No	Optional published audience label or code.
`category`	No	Optional published category code.
`pagePath`	Yes	Canonical GoVisit page path supplying this tool's published context; no origin, query or fragment.
`activityType`	No	Optional published activity type.
`neighborhood`	No	Optional published neighborhood.
`accessibility`	No	Optional published accessibility label or code.
`administrativeArea`	No	Optional published administrative area.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety and scope are covered. The description adds that results are capped at 20 matches, which is mildly useful context, but says nothing about ordering, whether the nearby set is fixed or computed, or what the response shape is beyond the count.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then the usage mechanic, then the result cap. Nothing is wasted, though the return-count sentence slightly restates the limit parameter's maximum of 20.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Nine parameters are fully documented in the schema and an output schema exists, so the description need only establish purpose and routing, which it does. The only real shortfall is the absence of explicit sibling routing for an agent choosing among many search/list tools.

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 one of the nine parameters is already documented, establishing a baseline of 3. The description mentions only that the path supplies the reference context and that filters apply to published details, adding no enum values, matching behavior, or partial-name semantics beyond the schema.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ('Find nearby suggestions shown on a single place profile') and scopes it to one reference place, which separates it from the broader search/list siblings. It stops short of naming a sibling it is not, so an agent must infer the boundary against tools like search_places or list_destination_highlights.

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?

It states the entry point ('Use the path of the reference place') and that the resulting nearby cards are filtered by published details, which implies the intended workflow. It offers no explicit when-not conditions or named alternatives for keyword-based or cross-place discovery, so routing guidance is only implied.

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

All GoVisit MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?