Skip to main content
Glama

InfraNode

by dev.infranode

Station Board: Arrivals

station_board_arrivals
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get live arrivals for ANY railway station by its EVA number.

Mirror of station_board_departures for arriving trains (all categories, real-time delays, disruption messages). Get the EVA from get_city_resource(slug, resource='stations'). Read-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
evaYesStation EVA number (digits only) from get_city_resource(slug, resource='stations'), e.g. '8000105' (Frankfurt Hbf).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes
metaYes

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it specifies the feed includes all train categories, real-time delays, and disruption messages. No contradictions with annotations are present.

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 short, focused sentences. First sentence states the core purpose with emphasis on any station. Second clarifies the sibling relationship. Third provides a prerequisite. No unnecessary words; every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool has a single parameter, full schema coverage, an output schema (not shown but present), and comprehensive annotations, the description provides sufficient context. It covers data type (live arrivals), scope (any station), supported features (delays, disruptions), and how to get the required input.

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 coverage is 100% with a detailed parameter description. The description adds further value by explicitly instructing how to obtain the EVA number from 'get_city_resource', which is a helpful cross-reference that goes beyond the schema's own explanation.

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 title 'Station Board: Arrivals' and description clearly state the tool retrieves live arrivals for railway stations by EVA number. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling 'station_board_departures' by calling itself its mirror for arriving trains, making purpose and differentiation unmistakable.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use: to get live arrivals. It contrasts with departures by referencing the mirror relationship, advises on obtaining the EVA parameter via 'get_city_resource', and declares the tool read-only. This provides clear usage context and alternatives.

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

All InfraNode toolsInspect
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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but there is potential confusion between 'get_city_resource' and specific resource accessors like 'weather', 'air_quality', 'transit_departures', 'station_board_arrivals', and 'station_board_departures'. The descriptions do clarify that some specific tools exist for convenience or source-specific details, but the boundary isn't always sharp. Also, 'compare' could overlap with using 'get_city_resource' repeatedly. An agent might hesitate between using the generic resource accessor and the named tool.

Naming Consistency4/5

The naming convention is mostly consistent: verbs like 'get', 'list', 'compare', and 'pois' (abbreviation) are used. The pattern is generally 'verb_noun' (e.g., 'get_city', 'list_cities', 'station_board_arrivals'). Minor deviations include 'pois' being an acronym rather than a full verb phrase, and 'air_quality' vs 'weather' implying a noun rather than an action. But overall it's predictable and readable.

Tool Count5/5

12 tools is a well-scoped count for a city data platform. The function set covers discovery (list_cities, sources), overview (get_city_overview), base data (get_city), specific data types (weather, air_quality, transit_departures, station_board_*, pois), a generic accessor (get_city_resource), and a comparison tool (compare). Each tool feels necessary and the set is not overwhelming.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface is quite comprehensive for a read-only city information server. It provides discovery (list_cities, get_city_overview), base data, and access to 81 data types via get_city_resource. The named tools cover the most common queries (weather, air quality, transit). A minor gap is the lack of a tool to aggregate or search across cities (though 'compare' helps). Editing or write operations are not expected here, but for read-only, it's nearly complete.

Resources