Skip to main content
Glama

Close API

by city.close

nearby_pois

Nearby points of interest and the travel time to each, from a location (metered: 1 token per returned row). One origin: block_geoid or lat+lon; keep limit small to control spend and context size. Many origins (up to 250): block_geoids or points — one batch call and one rate-limit request, rows tagged by origin, no limit/pagination, so filter with type/mode/max_minutes. Batching saves requests and context, not tokens: it still charges per row. A non-empty truncated (+ truncated_reason) means the balance or row budget cut the batch short.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latNo
lonNo
modeNowalk, bike, or transit.
typeNoDestination type id (see get_catalog).
limitNoMax rows (first page).
pointsNoMany lat/lon points — one batch call.
block_geoidNo
max_minutesNoUpper bound on travel time (<=30).
block_geoidsNoMany block GEOIDs — one batch call.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided; description fully shoulders transparency. Discloses token cost (1 per row), batch behavior (no limit/pagination, rows tagged by origin), truncation conditions (balance/row budget), and rate-limit request count. Contradicts nothing.

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?

Four sentences, each packed with information. Front-loaded with main action and key constraints. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate single vs batch), but no wasted words.

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?

9 parameters, no output schema, no annotations. Covers origins, batching, filtering, token cost, truncation. Lacks output format details but given complexity and zero annotations, the description is highly informative.

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 67%; description adds critical meaning: distinguishes single vs batch origins (lat+lon/block_geoid vs points/block_geoids), explains limit applies only to single origin, clarifies max_minutes cap (<=30). Does not detail every parameter but compensates with behavioral context.

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 verb ('travel time to each') and resource ('points of interest'), specifies origins (block_geoid or lat+lon) and batch capabilities, and distinguishes from siblings by highlighting batch processing and token costing.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: keep limit small for cost control, filter with type/mode/max_minutes, use batching to save requests. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but covers key usage scenarios.

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

All Close API 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: blocks_in_area provides per-block travel times, isochrone gives reachable areas, nearby_pois gives times to specific POIs, walkability_summary gives times to destination categories, and the rest handle place lookup, catalog, tokens, and authentication. No two tools overlap in functionality.

Naming Consistency2/5

Tool names mix styles: some start with verbs (find_place, get_catalog, redeem_code, request_sign_in), others are noun phrases (blocks_in_area, isochrone, nearby_pois, walkability_summary). There is no consistent verb_noun or noun pattern, making it harder for an agent to predict tool names.

Tool Count5/5

With 10 tools, the server covers core travel time analysis, place lookup, authentication, and membership. The count is well-scoped for the domain—neither too few to be useful nor too many to be confusing.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the major workflows: finding places, getting base data, computing travel times in various forms (blocks, isochrones, POIs, summaries), and managing API keys. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct tool for single-point travel time to arbitrary coordinates), but the set is largely complete for the stated purpose.

Resources