ThinAir Geo

traffic

Read-only

Retrieve live traffic conditions, congestion, and speed for a location. Use when traffic is needed independently of routing — for corridor monitoring, area congestion, or incident checks. COVERAGE: live data for ~30 major US metros; returns degraded or empty values outside these areas. For rural coordinates, qualify the response (e.g. 'no live traffic coverage here — showing free-flow speeds').

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lat`	Yes	Latitude
`lon`	Yes	Longitude
`units`	No	Speed units — auto-detected from location (mph in US/UK, km/h elsewhere). Override if needed. Accepts 'km'/'mi' as aliases.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`items`	No
`geojson`	No
`metrics`	No
`summary`	No	Map of scalar facts the LLM should surface verbatim
`display_hint`	No

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond annotations by disclosing coverage limitations (~30 major US metros), degraded/empty values outside those areas, and instructing to qualify responses for rural locations. This adds significant behavioral context that annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint) do not cover.

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?

The description is three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: core function, usage context, and coverage caveat. It is front-loaded and concise, with no filler.

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 a simple location-based tool, the description covers the essential caveat (coverage limitation) and usage context. An output schema exists, so return values are already specified, and annotations provide safety hints. The description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 parameters are already well-documented (lat/lon, units with auto-detection and aliases). The description adds no meaningful parameter information beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 tool retrieves live traffic conditions, congestion, and speed for a location, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this tool from siblings by noting 'independently of routing', which separates it from directions and routing-focused tools.

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?

Explicitly states when to use the tool ('when traffic is needed independently of routing') and provides use cases (corridor monitoring, area congestion, incident checks). It also includes guidance for handling rural coordinates, which shows thoughtful usage instructions beyond alternatives.

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?