Aura Courier MCP

compare_courier_rates

Execute side-by-side tariff, structured SLA ({min, max}), and COD collection fee comparisons across all four major Bangladeshi couriers (Steadfast, Pathao, RedX, Paperfly) for any destination nationwide using the unified tariff table (meta.source='static_tariff'). Evaluates exact parcel weight, declared COD amount, and optimization priority ('cheapest', 'fastest', 'balanced') to select the recommended courier. READ-ONLY CALCULATION ENGINE.

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": {
      "recipient_address": "<recipient_address>"
    },
    "name": "compare_courier_rates"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`priority`	No	Optimization priority (default: balanced)
`weight_kg`	No	Parcel weight in KG (default: 0.5)
`cod_amount`	No	Cash On Delivery amount in BDT (default: 0)
`recipient_address`	Yes	Destination delivery address anywhere in Bangladesh

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does explicitly declare 'READ-ONLY CALCULATION ENGINE' and disclose the data source (static tariff table), which tells the agent this is a non-mutating computation over cached rates. It stops short of covering tariff-data freshness, behavior for unsupported/unserviceable addresses, or rate limits, which matter for a tool whose whole premise is 'static' data.

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?

Two dense, front-loaded sentences that lead with the comparison scope and end with the safety profile. Minor waste in the internal implementation reference '(meta.source=\'static_tariff\')', which is not actionable for an agent selecting 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?

With only one required parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient: it previews the return content (structured SLA with min/max, COD fee, recommended courier) so the agent knows what comes back. A slightly fuller sketch of the per-courier result set would close the remaining gap.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter already carries a description and default, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The prose adds modest value by explaining how weight, declared COD amount, and priority combine to produce a recommendation, but adds no format, unit, or range detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (side-by-side comparison) plus the exact resources compared (tariff, SLA, COD fee) and the scope (all four named Bangladeshi couriers, nationwide). An agent can distinguish this from single-parcel or single-fee tools like calculate_delivery_zone_and_fee without opening the schema.

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?

Usage context is implied: 'for any destination nationwide' plus a priority parameter that selects the recommendation. However, it never says when to prefer this over siblings (e.g., list_couriers or calculate_delivery_zone_and_fee) or what conditions make it inapplicable.

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

All Aura Courier 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?