Gangway AIS

Port now

port_now

Read-onlyIdempotent

A port's picture now: vessels in port and at anchor, vessels expected (arriving) and the latest port events. Give a UN/LOCODE or a name. Credits: 5, nothing when the port is empty. Free accounts too: their answers are 24 hours behind, with a box of at most 1 square degree and 1,000 credits a month; paid plans are live.

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_now"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`port`	Yes	A port by UN/LOCODE (such as NLRTM) or by name (such as Rotterdam)
`limit`	No	At most this many vessels in each list (default 40)

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 annotations (readOnly, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive), it discloses cost (5 credits, free when the port is empty), latency for free accounts (24 hours behind), a spatial restriction (1 square degree box), and a monthly quota (1,000 credits). These are exactly the operational facts an agent needs before committing to a call and are not derivable from annotations or schema.

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?

It is compact and front-loads what the response contains before the cost and plan caveats. The final sentence is dense, packing latency, area limit, and quota into one clause, but every element is relevant.

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 no output schema, the description does the work of enumerating returned content (in-port, anchored, expected vessels, events) and adds cost and quota limits. It does not describe the shape of the returned events or whether empty lists are omitted, which leaves a minor gap for a data-returning tool.

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%, so the port and limit parameters are already fully documented, including the default of 40. The description only restates that the port can be a UN/LOCODE or a name, adding no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 the exact contents of the snapshot: vessels in port and at anchor, vessels expected, and recent port events, with a clear 'now' temporal scope. It is distinguishable from port_vessels or port_events by being a combined snapshot, though it never explicitly names a sibling to contrast with.

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 word 'now' and the bundled content; there is no explicit statement of when to pick this over port_vessels, port_events, or port_congestion. The free-account caveats do give useful context about when results may be unsuitable (24-hour delay, 1 square degree box), but that is pricing guidance rather than tool-selection guidance.

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?