madeira.fun Hiking Permits

Get Permit Fees

get_permit_fees

Read-onlyIdempotent

The government hiking permit fee records in force today (format MF-PRC-1.0, the same records as https://madeira.fun/hiking/permit-data), with legal references and exemptions. Give trail to get the fee that applies to that trail. The fee is paid to the government, never to madeira.fun.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_permit_fees"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`trail`	No	Optional. The trail: its seo_slug from list_permit_trails (preferred), a code such as "PR 18", "PR18" or "PS PR1", or a name such as "Levada do Rei". Accents are ignored.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds valuable context: the records are current ('in force today'), follow format MF-PRC-1.0, mirror a public URL, include legal references and exemptions, and fees are paid to the government rather than madeira.fun.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its currency, then a usage instruction, then a payment-direction clarification. Every sentence carries some value, though the payment note is a slight tangent from the core fee lookup.

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 simple one-optional-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the description supplies source, format, currentness, content hints (legal references, exemptions), payment direction, and how to supply the trail. It does not describe returned fields, but that gap is minor given the tool's simplicity.

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%, and the schema already explains that 'trail' accepts an seo_slug, code, or name and that accents are ignored. The description only says 'Give trail to get the fee that applies to that trail,' adding no syntax or format details beyond 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: retrieving government hiking permit fee records in force today, including legal references and exemptions. It is clearly distinct from the reservation-flow siblings, but does not explicitly name a sibling it differs from (only mentions list_permit_trails as a source for the slug).

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 implied by 'Give trail to get the fee that applies to that trail,' and it usefully points to list_permit_trails for the preferred seo_slug. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or contrast with the other sibling tools.

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

All madeira.fun Hiking Permits 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?