Gangway AIS

Port congestion

port_congestion

Read-onlyIdempotent

How busy a port is against its own normal: an index, vessels waiting now, the median wait and the arrivals and departures day by day over the last days (default 30). Credits: 5, nothing when we hold no figures for it. Needs a paid plan: Data API Plus, Pro or Scale, or a paid Watch plan (https://gangwayais.com/#pricing).

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": {
      "port": "<port>"
    },
    "name": "port_congestion"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`days`	No	Days back from now (default 30)
`port`	Yes	A port by UN/LOCODE (such as NLRTM) or by name (such as Rotterdam)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only/idempotent annotations, the description discloses three operational facts an agent cannot get elsewhere: a fixed cost of 5 credits, zero charge when no figures are held, and a hard entitlement gate (Data API Plus/Pro/Scale or a paid Watch plan, with a pricing link). The no-data case is exactly the kind of billing behavior that affects whether an agent should call the tool.

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 payload leads with what the tool returns, then appends cost and plan constraints in two short clauses. Dense but front-loaded and free of filler; the pricing URL is the only slightly extraneous element, though it is arguably load-bearing for an entitlement gate.

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?

For a two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers what comes back, cost behavior, and access requirements, leaving little ambiguity about the call itself. The one gap is disambiguation from the cluster of sibling port tools, which is a guidance issue rather than a completeness-of-call issue.

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 port and days parameters are already fully documented. The description only restates the default of 30 days and adds nothing about port identifier formats or the 90-day ceiling; baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the load.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific resource and scope — congestion measured against a port's own baseline — and enumerates the returned measures (index, vessels waiting now, median wait, daily arrivals/departures). It is clear what the tool produces, though it never contrasts itself with siblings like port_waiting_times or port_now, which likely overlap on the wait-time figures.

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 is only implied by the phrase 'how busy a port is against its own normal' plus the default 30-day window. There is no explicit statement of when to reach for this instead of port_now, port_waiting_times or port_events, and no exclusions or prerequisites beyond the plan requirement.

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

All Gangway AIS 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?