MapMap

replan_routes

Re-plan a fleet part-way through its shift. Send the day back; nothing is stored. MapMap holds NO dispatch state — no plan, no vehicle position, no completion log — so a re-plan is not a delta against something we remember: you pass the ORIGINAL optimise_routes problem in full, plus progress (per vehicle: completed_stop_ids IN THE ORDER SERVED, an optional current_position, and unavailable: true for a breakdown or an end of hours) and/or changes (cancel_job_ids, add_jobs, add_shipments), and get a fresh plan for what is left. That costs bandwidth and buys the absence of a server-side plan that can go stale, leak, or fall out of step with the telematics platform that actually owns the truth — and it makes a re-plan reproducible: the same body always yields the same answer. Completed stops are LOCKED by construction: they are removed from the problem entirely and each vehicle starts from where it actually is, so the solver cannot move a stop that has already happened — a guarantee the solver cannot break, rather than a hint it is free to ignore. At least one progress entry or one change is required. Returns the same plan shape as optimise_routes for the REMAINING work, plus a replan block: the prefix locked per vehicle, where each re-plans from and how that was decided, stops released from a vehicle that can no longer serve them, tasks forced unassigned, and a note for every id that did not resolve. Read that block — a stop that vanished from the plan is named there rather than left for a dispatcher to notice at four in the afternoon; a cancelled id that matched nothing is reported there too rather than refused. Multi-trip vehicles cannot be re-planned: a completion does not say which trip it belongs to, so a problem whose vehicles declare reloads is refused with what to send instead. Billed on the remaining problem, not the original. Requires the MapMap gateway.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`jobs`	No	Single-stop jobs (at least one job or shipment overall).
`truck`	No	Truck profile (dimensions + ADR declaration). Requires costing "truck"; the travel-time matrix then respects dimensional and dangerous-goods restrictions, so the whole plan is truck-legal.
`changes`	No	Changes to the work itself. Optional, on the same condition.
`costing`	No	Costing model for the travel-time matrix: "auto" (default), "truck", "bicycle", "pedestrian" or "motor_scooter".	auto
`progress`	No	Per-vehicle progress. Optional, but at least one progress entry or one change is required — a re-plan that reports nothing new is the original problem.
`vehicles`	Yes	The fleet (at least one vehicle, each with a start and/or end).
`emissions`	No	The fleet's emission declaration, for UK clean-air / low-emission zone assessment. On its own it annotates: the response's `zones` block names every zone containing one of the problem's own locations and what this vehicle would pay there. With `avoid_zones` it also steers the internal travel-time matrix away from those zones, so the plan itself changes.
`shipments`	No	Pickup+delivery pairs.
`avoid_zones`	No	Keep the optimisation's travel-time matrix out of every zone the declared vehicle would be charged or banned in. Requires `emissions`.
`territories`	No	Fleet territories: named polygons that bound which vehicle may serve which stop, referenced by `vehicles[].territory_ids`. These are request data — caller-drawn rounds, validated per call and never stored. Nothing to do with clean-air zones or with the offline map packages of the same word.
`relax_if_unassigned`	No	Re-solve ONCE with these relaxations if the first solve leaves work unassigned, and say honestly which plan came back. At most one second solve, never beyond the caps you state, and the relaxed plan is returned only if it assigns MORE work than the first — giving away constraints for nothing is strictly worse than not giving them away. Breaks are never widened, nor are capacities, skills, territories or task caps: only time windows move, and only by the stated amounts. Bills as two solves when the second one runs.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`zones`	No	Clean-air / low-emission zones touching the problem's own locations, and what the declared vehicle pays in each. Present only when `emissions` was declared.
`replan`	Yes	What the re-plan locked and why: the prefix held per vehicle, where each vehicle re-plans from and how that was decided, stops released from a vehicle that could no longer serve them, tasks forced unassigned, and a note for every id that did not resolve. Read it. A stop that vanished from the plan is named here rather than left for the dispatcher to notice at four in the afternoon.
`routes`	Yes	One optimised route per used vehicle.
`profile`	Yes	The matrix costing profile the plan was computed with ("auto", "truck", "bicycle", "pedestrian" or "motor_scooter").
`reloads`	No	The multi-trip split: each vehicle's trips, their windows, the depot each returns to, and the stated approximation. Present only when a vehicle declared `reloads`. Read the `basis` inside it before quoting arrival times. The trip windows are fixed BEFORE the solve, so a lorry that tips early cannot lend the spare time to its next trip: stops can come back unassigned that a truly sequential model would have served. The plan is feasible, never optimistic — it cannot put a vehicle in two places at once — but it is not optimal. Re-plan after each tip through `replan_routes` for the tighter answer.
`summary`	Yes	Solution summary.
`relaxation`	No	The relaxation report: the caps requested, whether a second solve ran, whether ITS plan is the one returned, what was widened, and what is still unassigned. Present only when `relax_if_unassigned` was declared. Always read `second_solve` and `relaxed_plan_used` before telling anyone the day fits. A plan produced under relaxation has had promises moved, and the block is what says so.
`unassigned`	Yes	Tasks the solver could not assign to any vehicle.
`territories`	No	How the territories bound the plan: which vehicle was eligible for what, and any task no eligible vehicle existed for. Present only when `territories` was declared.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed10 schema fields changedSep 23, 2026

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"
```

addedOutput 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"
+  }
+]

changedOutput 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."

removedOutput 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"
-  }
-}

removedOutput schema / $defs / LatLon / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "lat",
-  "lon"
-]
```
removedOutput schema / $defs / LatLon / type
```
Removed value: -"object"
```

AddedSep 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently explains that nothing is stored server-side, that the call is reproducible, that completed stops are locked by construction, that multi-trip problems are refused, that billing is on the remaining problem, and that the MapMap gateway is required.

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 long, but the tool is complex and no annotations or short schema can carry the needed context. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and major constraints, though the single-block prose style and some rhetorical flourishes add length without much structural aid.

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?

For an 11-parameter tool with a full output schema, the description is unusually complete. It covers prerequisites, input requirements, failure modes, response contents, limitations, and billing. An agent has everything needed to decide when to call it and how to construct a valid request.

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 cross-parameter semantics beyond the schema: the original `optimise_routes` problem must be passed in full, at least one progress entry or change is required, `completed_stop_ids` are a locked prefix, and vehicles declaring `reloads` cannot be re-planned.

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 opens with a specific action and resource: "Re-plan a fleet part-way through its shift." It clearly distinguishes this from `optimise_routes` by explaining that the original problem plus `progress` and/or `changes` is sent back and a fresh plan for remaining work is returned.

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 explicit when-to-use context and clear exclusions: at least one progress entry or change is required, multi-trip vehicles cannot be re-planned, and a re-plan reporting nothing new is essentially the original problem. It references `optimise_routes` as the source of the problem shape but does not explicitly name an alternative tool to use instead.

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

All MapMap 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?