Skip to main content
Glama

FreightUtils MCP Server

by io.github.SoapyRED

HS Code Lookup

hs_code_lookup
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search 6,940 WCO Harmonized System (HS 2022) commodity codes — the 6-digit international customs classification layer. The first 2 digits are the chapter, 4 the heading, 6 the subheading.

Provide ONE of: query (free-text description search, min 2 chars), code (2-6 digit lookup, returns the code plus its hierarchy), or section (Roman numeral I-XXI to browse a section).

Behavior: read-only; description search is keyword-based against official HS descriptions, so everyday product words can return zero rows — count 0 with an empty results[] is a valid answer (e.g. "laptop" and "computers" find nothing; "automatic data" matches the official phrasing "automatic data processing machines"); prefer the formal tariff wording. Rate-limited (anonymous use: 25 requests/day per IP): a 429 error body carries retry_after_seconds and a Retry-After header — back off and retry, or call get_subscribe_link for higher limits.

Returns: the query/code echo, count and results[] (hscode, description and hierarchy context) under result, plus confidence, _source and citation (the FreightUtils v1 response envelope).

Limitations: the 6-digit international level only — national tariff lines (8-10 digits) and duty rates are set per country; classification here is indicative, not a binding ruling.

Related: uk_duty_calculator (duty/VAT for a code found here), ics2_check (EU ENS goods-description quality — a different check entirely).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoExact HS code (2-6 digits)
queryNoSearch by product description (min 2 chars)
sectionNoBrowse by section (Roman numeral I–XXI)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYes
resultYes
_sourceYes
citationYes
validityNo
warningsNo
confidenceYes
blocking_errorsNo
envelope_versionYes
normalized_inputNo

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint), the description discloses search behavior (keyword-based, zero-result cases), rate limits (25/day, 429 handling), and limitations (international level only, non-binding). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is longer but well-structured with dedicated paragraphs for behavior, returns, limitations, and related tools. Every sentence contributes useful information, and the main purpose is front-loaded.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, all input modes, behavioral nuances, output envelope, rate limiting, limitations, and related tools. Given the tool's complexity, the description is comprehensive and self-contained.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Although the schema descriptions are terse, the tool description adds substantial meaning: explains the hierarchical structure (chapter/heading/subheading), details what each parameter returns (code returns hierarchy; section browses), and provides concrete examples of query behavior. This goes well beyond the schema.

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 description clearly states the tool searches 6,940 WCO HS 2022 commodity codes, specifying the resource and action. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by naming uk_duty_calculator and ics2_check as related tools with different purposes.

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?

Provides explicit usage instructions: 'Provide ONE of: query, code, or section,' and explains when to use each. It also names alternatives and clarifies that ics2_check is a different check entirely.

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

All FreightUtils MCP Server 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

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

The tools cluster into clear domains and the descriptions are detailed, but there are several overlapping pairs: consignment_calculator vs shipment_summary, cbm_calculator vs unit_converter, and validate vs resolve_reference all have fuzzy boundaries. An agent could plausibly mis-select between the composite calculators or between identifier-handling tools despite the helpful cross-references.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming is mostly consistent: reference tools use *_lookup, calculation tools use *_calculator, and checks use *_check. Exceptions like validate, resolve_reference, nearest_airport, and shipment_summary break the dominant pattern slightly, but all names are snake_case and generally predictable.

Tool Count3/5

At 25 tools, this sits at the heavy end of the range for an MCP server. The broad freight/logistics scope justifies many of them, but several single-purpose calculators could have been consolidated or grouped, making the surface feel larger and more redundant than necessary.

Completeness4/5

The server covers ADR dangerous-goods rules, multi-modal freight calculations, equipment lookups, identifier validation, customs/trade data, and emissions estimation. Minor gaps exist—no routing/geocoding, no SCAC/BIC coverage, no customs filing—but core freight-reference and calculation workflows are well supported.

Resources