TrustyData

Itinéraire routier complet

compute_route

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calcule un itinéraire complet entre une origine et une destination sur le réseau France (OpenStreetMap), au choix en voiture, à pied ou à vélo : distance, durée, étapes de navigation en français, boîte englobante et géométrie encodée (polyline6). Mode de déplacement : car (voiture, défaut), walking (à pied) ou cycling (à vélo). Les valeurs du contrat d'API (auto, pieton, velo) sont acceptées telles quelles. Les consignes suivent le mode — « Conduisez… », « Marchez… », « Pédalez… » — et la réponse renvoie le mode utilisé : une durée n'est interprétable qu'accompagnée du mode qui l'a produite. ⚠️ Chaque mode a sa distance maximale : 5 000 km en voiture, 500 km à vélo, 250 km à pied ; au-delà la réponse est un 422 explicite, pas une panne. Pour de simples distances en masse, préfère route_matrix. Plan minimum : Business. Mention OSM ODbL obligatoire.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mode`	No	Mode de déplacement : `car` (défaut), `walking` ou `cycling`.
`origin`	Yes	Point de départ : adresse libre OU couple `lat`/`lon`.
`destination`	Yes	Point d'arrivée : adresse libre OU couple `lat`/`lon`.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed8 schema fields changedSep 14, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / destination / description

Previous value: -"A ``RoutePoint`` is EITHER a free-text ``address`` OR a ``lat``/``lon`` couple\n(mutually exclusive), mirroring trusty-service's ``RouteEndpointInput``."New value: +"Point d'arrivée : adresse libre OU couple `lat`/`lon`."

addedInput schema / properties / destination / properties / lat / description
```
Added value: +"Latitude WGS84, avec `lon` (XOR address)."
```
addedInput schema / properties / destination / properties / lon / description
```
Added value: +"Longitude WGS84, avec `lat` (XOR address)."
```

addedInput schema / properties / mode / description

Added value: +"Mode de déplacement : `car` (défaut), `walking` ou `cycling`."

changedInput schema / properties / origin / description

Previous value: -"A ``RoutePoint`` is EITHER a free-text ``address`` OR a ``lat``/``lon`` couple\n(mutually exclusive), mirroring trusty-service's ``RouteEndpointInput``."New value: +"Point de départ : adresse libre OU couple `lat`/`lon`."

addedInput schema / properties / origin / properties / lat / description
```
Added value: +"Latitude WGS84, avec `lon` (XOR address)."
```
addedInput schema / properties / origin / properties / lon / description
```
Added value: +"Longitude WGS84, avec `lat` (XOR address)."
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 13, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / destination / description

Added value: +"A ``RoutePoint`` is EITHER a free-text ``address`` OR a ``lat``/``lon`` couple\n(mutually exclusive), mirroring trusty-service's ``RouteEndpointInput``."

addedInput schema / properties / origin / description

Added value: +"A ``RoutePoint`` is EITHER a free-text ``address`` OR a ``lat``/``lon`` couple\n(mutually exclusive), mirroring trusty-service's ``RouteEndpointInput``."

Changed1 schema field changedSep 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / mode

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}

First observedJul 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context: mode-specific maximum distances (5,000 km car, 500 km vélo, 250 km à pied) with a 422 error response, the fact that duration is only interpretable with the mode, and the OSM ODbL attribution requirement. It also explains that API contract values ('auto', 'pieton', 'velo') are accepted. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 front-loads the core function, then lists outputs, then mode details, then limits, then alternatives. Every sentence adds value. It's slightly long but each piece is necessary for correct invocation (mode limits, plan requirement, attribution). The warning emoji draws attention to the critical constraint.

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 (3 modes, nested origin/destination objects, output schema present), the description covers the essential operational details: mode values, distance limits, error behavior, plan requirement, attribution, and sibling routing. The output schema exists so return values don't need explanation. Minor gap: it doesn't mention whether the route is restricted to France-only or what happens with cross-border routes, but the 'réseau France' is stated upfront.

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 the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly (origin/destination with lat/lon/address XOR logic, mode with default). The description adds the mode values ('car', 'walking', 'cycling') and the API contract aliases ('auto', 'pieton', 'velo'), which is useful but the schema already covers the core semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Calcule') and resource ('itinéraire complet entre une origine et une destination sur le réseau France (OpenStreetMap)'), and lists the output components (distance, durée, étapes, boîte englobante, géométrie polyline6). It also distinguishes itself from route_matrix by explicitly saying 'Pour de simples distances en masse, préfère route_matrix.' This clearly differentiates it from siblings.

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?

The description explicitly says when to use this tool vs alternatives: 'Pour de simples distances en masse, préfère route_matrix.' It also provides mode-specific guidance (car/walking/cycling), maximum distances per mode, and the plan requirement ('Plan minimum : Business'). This is explicit when/when-not guidance.

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

All TrustyData 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.