Skip to main content
Glama

MapMap

by ai.mapmap
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

matrix

Compute a travel time/distance matrix between origins (rows) and destinations (columns). Costing "auto", "truck" (with optional truck profile as in route), "bicycle", "pedestrian" or "motor_scooter". Returns durations_s[i][j] in seconds and distances_m[i][j] in metres; null cells are unreachable pairs. Up to 10,000 cells per call (origins × destinations). Optional exclude_polygons for before/after scenarios ("close this bridge and recompute the matrix"): an array of polygons, each an array of [lon, lat] pairs forming one ring — longitude FIRST — whose intersecting roads are excluded from every cell's path finding. Applies to the Valhalla engine; unsupported on the GraphHopper engine, where it is ignored.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
truckNoTruck profile (dimensions + ADR declaration). Requires costing "truck".
costingNoCosting model: "auto" (default), "truck", "bicycle", "pedestrian" or "motor_scooter".auto
originsYesOrigin locations (matrix rows).
destinationsYesDestination locations (matrix columns).
exclude_polygonsNoAreas to avoid — scenario analysis ("close this bridge and recompute the matrix"): an array of polygons, each an array of `[lon, lat]` pairs forming one exterior ring (GeoJSON-style, longitude FIRST). Roads intersecting any ring are excluded from every cell's path finding. Applies to the Valhalla engine; unsupported on the GraphHopper engine, where it is ignored.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
distances_mYesTravel distances in metres, same shape as `durations_s`. Null cells are unreachable pairs.
durations_sYesTravel times in seconds; `durations_s[i][j]` is origin `i` → destination `j`. Null cells are unreachable pairs.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / $defs / LatLon / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "properties": {
+      "lat": {
+        "description": "Latitude in decimal degrees (−90 to 90).",
+        "format": "double",
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "lon": {
+        "description": "Longitude in decimal degrees (−180 to 180).",
+        "format": "double",
+        "type": "number"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "lat",
+      "lon"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "description": "GeoJSON position [lon, lat]: longitude FIRST.",
+    "items": {
+      "format": "double",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "maxItems": 2,
+    "minItems": 2,
+    "type": "array"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / $defs / LatLon / description
      Previous value: -"A WGS84 coordinate pair in decimal degrees."New value: +"A WGS84 coordinate in decimal degrees: a {lat, lon} object (preferred), or a GeoJSON [lon, lat] array with LONGITUDE FIRST, the same order as every polygon field on this server."
    • removedInput schema / $defs / LatLon / properties
      Removed value: -{
-  "lat": {
-    "description": "Latitude in decimal degrees (−90 to 90).",
-    "format": "double",
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  "lon": {
-    "description": "Longitude in decimal degrees (−180 to 180).",
-    "format": "double",
-    "type": "number"
-  }
-}
    • removedInput schema / $defs / LatLon / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "lat",
-  "lon"
-]
    • removedInput schema / $defs / LatLon / type
      Removed value: -"object"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output format (durations_s, distances_m), the null-cell semantics for unreachable pairs, the 10,000-cell limit, and the engine-specific behavior of exclude_polygons. This is substantial behavioral context beyond the 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?

The description is dense but well-organized: it opens with the core function, then covers costing, output, limits, and the optional parameter. Every sentence adds value. It is slightly long but justified by the complexity of the tool.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 params, output schema, engine-specific behavior), the description covers the essential operational details: output units, null semantics, cell limit, and engine caveat. It does not explain how to interpret the output schema in detail, but the output schema exists and the description need not repeat it.

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 meaningful semantics: it explains the row/column mapping of origins/destinations, the cell limit calculation, and the scenario-analysis use case for exclude_polygons. It also clarifies the coordinate order for polygons. This goes beyond the schema's field descriptions.

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 ('Compute') and resource ('travel time/distance matrix between origins (rows) and destinations (columns)'), and enumerates the supported costing modes. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling routing tools like 'route' and 'reachable_area' by focusing on the matrix structure and cell-based output.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context for when to use the tool (matrix computation, scenario analysis with exclude_polygons) and even names the engine-specific behavior (Valhalla vs GraphHopper). It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when NOT to use it, but the context is strong enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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

All MapMap toolsInspect
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