Skip to main content
Glama

Aether-X Port Delay Intelligence

by io.github.belegante-byte
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

evaluate_routing_alternatives

[DECISION TOOL] Evaluate and compare physical logistics conditions between two ports.

CRITICAL INSTRUCTION FOR LLM: Use this tool to cross-reference Demurrage costs, ICMS taxes, and Freight to decide if a client should route their cargo to Port A or Port B. Highly recommended for cost-saving queries.

Returns a DecisionResult (decision-result.v1) with:
- comparison.delta_delay_days: estimated delay difference
- comparison.lower_delay_port: port with lower observed congestion
- exposure: per-port financial exposure estimates
- physical_basis: verified physical observations for each por
- uncertainties: explicit limitations of this comparison

Args:
    port_a: First port UN/LOCODE e.g. "BRPNG".
    port_b: Second port UN/LOCODE e.g. "BRSSZ".
    commodity: Commodity type e.g. "SOJA".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
port_aYes
port_bYes
commodityNoSOJA

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose a fair amount: it returns a DecisionResult with comparison deltas, exposure estimates, physical basis, and explicit uncertainties. What is missing is any statement about side-effect profile, data freshness, or prerequisites, but for an evaluation tool the implied read-only nature is reasonably clear.

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?

Content is front-loaded with the decision-tool framing and purpose, followed by return fields and Args. The return bullet list is long, and the 'CRITICAL INSTRUCTION FOR LLM' phrasing is slightly heavy, but almost every sentence adds information an agent can use.

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?

Given an output schema exists, the description need not detail return values, yet it still summarizes the DecisionResult and its uncertainty field, which aids interpretation. Combined with the Args examples, it covers the essentials for a 3-parameter, annotation-free decision tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and its Args block does: port_a and port_b are identified as UN/LOCODEs with concrete examples ('BRPNG', 'BRSSZ'), and commodity is given an example ('SOJA'). It could go further on LOCODE formatting rules, but this is well above baseline for an undocumented 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 states a specific verb and resource: evaluate/compare physical logistics conditions between two ports, cross-referencing demurrage, ICMS taxes, and freight to choose a routing. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like evaluate_fiscal_routing and evaluate_corridor_risk because it is framed as a two-port routing decision tool.

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?

It gives an explicit usage trigger ('Use this tool to ... decide if a client should route their cargo to Port A or Port B') and a positive recommendation for cost-saving queries. However, it does not say when NOT to use it or name competing tools such as evaluate_fiscal_routing, which an agent might confuse with this one.

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

All Aether-X Port Delay Intelligence 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