ThinAir Geo

distance_matrix

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compute road distances and travel times for every origin → destination pair. Endpoints accept free-text addresses or 'lat,lon' strings; N × M is capped at 625 pairs. Use for fleet dispatch, nearest-depot, and bulk ETA tables.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`units`	No	Distance units (default kilometers)
`costing`	No	Transport mode (default auto)
`origins`	Yes	Origin endpoints (1–25): address or 'lat,lon'
`destinations`	Yes	Destination endpoints (1–25): address or 'lat,lon'

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`meta`	No
`units`	Yes
`matrix`	Yes	matrix[i][j] = origin i → destination j (distance + duration)
`costing`	Yes
`origins`	Yes	Geocoded origin locations
`destinations`	Yes	Geocoded destination locations
`upstream_error`	No

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context: endpoints accept free-text addresses or 'lat,lon' strings, and N×M is capped at 625 pairs. This goes beyond 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three concise sentences, each earning its place: core function, input constraints, and use cases. No filler or redundancy, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 a rich output schema and annotations, the description covers purpose, input constraints, and usage contexts. It lacks explicit error-handling details, but the output schema supplied separately fills the return structure gap, making it sufficiently complete for an agent.

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%, with all parameters (origins, destinations, units, costing) fully documented. The description's mention of address formats and the 625-pair cap adds only marginal value beyond the schema, which already specifies maxItems and parameter formats.

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 exactly what the tool does: 'Compute road distances and travel times for every origin → destination pair.' This specific verb and resource clearly distinguish it from siblings like 'directions' (single route) and 'geocode' (address lookup).

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 provides clear use cases: 'fleet dispatch, nearest-depot, and bulk ETA tables.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use, so it misses the top bar for explicit exclusions, but the context is unmistakable.

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

All ThinAir Geo tools Inspect

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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose. Overlapping tools (geocode vs geocode_structured, explore vs search_places, map_match vs trace_attributes) are explicitly differentiated in their descriptions, with cross-references guiding correct selection. No two tools appear to do the same thing.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a predictable verb_noun pattern (geocode, reverse_geocode, batch_geocode, search_places, resolve_intersection), but there are minor deviations: some tools use noun-only names (directions, traffic, weather) and a couple use noun_verb order (place_get, geofence_contains). This creates slight inconsistency but remains readable.

Tool Count4/5

At 19 tools, the set is slightly heavy but each tool earns its place by covering a distinct geospatial function. The breadth spans geocoding, routing, places, telematics, geofencing, traffic, weather, and account management, making the count reasonable for a comprehensive geo API.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface is remarkably complete for a geospatial server: forward, reverse, batch, structured, and intersection geocoding; routing, matrix, and isochrones; place search, exploration, and ID lookup; map matching, trace attributes, and point snapping; plus geofencing, traffic, weather, and quota management. No critical gaps or dead ends apparent.

Resources

Need Help?