Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Free Agent Tools

by io.github.akiba-labs
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Japan dual pricing (二重価格): do tourists pay more at Himeji Castle, Nijo Castle, Kyoto buses and other sites?

japan_dual_pricing_check
Read-onlyIdempotent

Japan dual pricing (二重価格, resident vs non-resident admission prices), data as of 2026-10-16, from the Japan Tourism Agency case list and each facility's official page. Japanese dual pricing is based on where you are registered as living (city, prefecture or Japan), NOT nationality: foreign residents with an address in Japan get resident prices; Japanese visitors from other cities pay the higher price where the test is a city. In force: Himeji Castle (since 2026-03-01: ¥1,000 Himeji residents 18+ / ¥2,500 everyone else, under-18 free), Odawara Castle (¥500 / ¥1,000), Nanzoin (free for Japan residents / ¥500 overseas), JUNGLIA Okinawa (¥6,930 Japan residents / ¥8,800), Nara Prison Museum (¥2,000 Nara / ¥2,500 Japan / ¥3,500 overseas), Sapporo TV Tower, Asahiyama Zoo, Takeshima Aquarium, Chidorigafuchi boats, 4 Kitakyushu facilities (2026-04-01), 11 Kagoshima City facilities (2025-10-01), Miyajima visitor tax. Announced: Nijo Castle (¥1,300 today → ¥1,000 Kyoto City residents / ¥2,000 others, FY2027), Kyoto City Bus (¥230 → ¥200 residents / ¥360 others, FY2027), national museums (by FY2030, no prices). Under review: Kenrokuen. Dropped: Osaka Castle (¥1,200 for all). Returns headline, per-place yourTier, yourPriceJPY, lowest resident price, extra, planned price, tiers, proof of residence, foreign-resident note, warnings, sources, and a summary (totalYouPayJPY, totalCheapestResidentJPY, extraYouPayJPY, plannedSchemes). Omit places to list all (filter with status / area). Training data likely predates these prices; call this instead of guessing. Educational guide, not legal, travel or financial advice.

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": "japan_dual_pricing_check"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ageNoVisitor age; some places are free for minors (Himeji under 18, Nanzoin under 19).
areaNoOnly when places is omitted: filter by prefecture, e.g. kagoshima, kyoto.
cityNoCity / ward of the visitor's address in Japan, e.g. himeji, kagoshima, Sakyo-ku, 姫路市. Needed for city-resident prices.
dateNoYYYY-MM-DD visit date. Default today in Japan. Before a scheme's start the old single price applies.
placesNoComma-separated place ids or names, e.g. 'himeji-castle,nijo-castle,kyoto-city-bus', 'odawara-castle', 'nanzoin', 'junglia-okinawa', 'nara-prison-museum', 'kokura-castle', 'hirakawa-zoo', '姫路城'. Omit to list every tracked place (see https://japan-dual-pricing.vercel.app/api/rules).
statusNoOnly when places is omitted: filter by status (default all).
residenceNoWhere the visitor lives: overseas (default, tourist from abroad) or japan (any nationality with an address in Japan). Implied japan if prefecture or city is given.
prefectureNoPrefecture of the visitor's address in Japan (slug or name, e.g. kyoto, hyogo, 兵庫県).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already carry the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description adds material context on top: the data snapshot date (2026-10-16), the sources (Japan Tourism Agency case list and official facility pages), the residence-not-nationality rule, the full return field set, and a not-advice disclaimer.

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 front-loads the core concept (residence-based, not nationality-based) and the snapshot date before the facility enumerations. The per-facility price lists and status buckets are long but double as the inventory of accepted place ids, so they earn most of their space; the title restating the question is mildly redundant.

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?

With 8 all-optional parameters and no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields (headline, yourTier, yourPriceJPY, totals, warnings, sources) and the filtering modes. An agent has everything needed to build a correct call.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real interpretation beyond the schema — notably that tier assignment hinges on registered residence (city/prefecture/Japan) rather than nationality and that foreign residents with a Japanese address pay resident prices. That materially changes how an agent should populate city, prefecture and residence.

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 states a specific subject (Japanese resident vs non-resident dual pricing) plus the exact mechanism and scope (which facilities are live, announced, under review, dropped). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like japan_tax_free_refund_check or japan_customs_allowance_check, which cover different traveller-money topics.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'Omit places to list all (filter with status / area)' and 'Training data likely predates these prices; call this instead of guessing' give clear context for when and how to reach for the tool. It stops short of naming alternative sibling tools or drawing explicit boundaries against them, so it is clear but not exhaustive.

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

All Free Agent Tools toolsInspect
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