Gangway AIS

Expected, in port, arrived, departed

port_vessels

Read-onlyIdempotent

A port's list of vessels: expected (bound for it), in port now, arrived or departed over the last 7 days. Filter by kind, flag and length. Credits: 1 per vessel returned. 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_vessels"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`flag`	No	Only this flag, a two-letter ISO country code
`kind`	No	Only this kind of vessel
`list`	No	Which list (default expected)
`port`	Yes	A port by UN/LOCODE (such as NLRTM) or by name (such as Rotterdam)
`limit`	No	At most this many vessels (default 50)
`max_length_m`	No	Only vessels at most this long, in metres
`min_length_m`	No	Only vessels at least this long, in metres

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already carry readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds genuinely new operational context: 1 credit per vessel returned, a paid-plan requirement with a pricing link, and the 7-day lookback on arrived/departed. Only the response shape and ordering are undisclosed, which with no output schema keeps it from a 5.

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 tight sentences: scope first, filters second, cost/plan constraint last. Every sentence carries distinct information an agent needs, with no repetition of the schema.

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 7-parameter read tool it covers scope, filters, time window, cost, and plan gating, which is the decision-relevant surface. It does not say what fields come back per vessel, but with no output schema that omission is minor rather than disqualifying.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is high, and the description still adds semantic weight: it defines 'expected' as 'bound for it' and groups kind/flag/length as filters, clarifying intent over the raw enum labels. The limit and min/max length parameters are left entirely to the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'A port's list of vessels', then enumerates the four sub-lists (expected, in port now, arrived, departed) with their temporal meaning. That distinguishes it from area/vessel-search siblings well enough, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

The list semantics and filter dimensions (kind, flag, length) imply when the tool fits, and the 7-day window bounds one case. However, nothing states when to prefer this over port_now, vessels_in_area, or port_calls_on_date, leaving the agent to infer the choice.

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?