Skip to main content
Glama

onebusaway-mcp-server

by io.github.cyanheads

Search Stops by Name or Code

onebusaway_search_stops
Read-only

Search for stops by name or code. Returns matching stops with IDs and coordinates. Use to resolve a human-readable stop name or number to a stop ID for arrivals lookups with onebusaway_get_arrivals.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesStop name fragment or stop code (e.g. "University Way" or "75403").
maxCountNoMaximum number of results to return. A positive integer, at most 100. Defaults to 10.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
capNoThe maxCount limit applied to truncated results.
countNoNumber of stops returned.
errorNoPresent when the call failed. Absent on success.
queryNoSearch query sent to the API.
shownNoNumber of stops returned when results were truncated.
stopsNoStops matching the search query.
noticeNoGuidance when no stops matched — e.g. try a different name fragment or use onebusaway_find_stops with coordinates.
truncatedNoTrue when matching stops exceeded maxCount.
limitExceededNoTrue if more stops match than were returned; raise maxCount or refine the query to see all.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds that it returns IDs and coordinates, which is helpful context, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as rate limits, ordering, or edge cases. With annotations covering safety, the extra value is moderate.

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 two sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the core function, then the use case. Every word earns its place, making it efficient for an agent to parse quickly.

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 the presence of an output schema (which presumably defines the return structure), the description doesn't need to detail return fields beyond mentioning IDs and coordinates. The required parameter and optional maxCount are clearly defined in the schema. The description provides context for why an agent would call this tool, which is sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

The schema covers both parameters fully (100% coverage), with descriptions for 'query' noting it accepts a name fragment or code, and for 'maxCount' including default and limits. The tool description adds no further semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clear verb ('Search'), a specific resource ('stops'), and the distinguishing scope ('by name or code'). It also specifies what is returned ('matching stops with IDs and coordinates'), making it easy to differentiate from other search tools like onebusaway_search_routes.

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?

The description explicitly tells when to use the tool: 'Use to resolve a human-readable stop name or number to a stop ID for arrivals lookups with onebusaway_get_arrivals.' This provides a concrete use case and implies the tool is for obtaining stop IDs, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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

All onebusaway-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

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct operation: find_* for location-based search, search_* for text-based search, get_* for fetching by ID, list_* for enumeration, and get_arrivals for real-time vs get_schedule_for_* for scheduled data. Even similar pairs like find_routes/search_routes are clearly differentiated by their search mode.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a uniform `onebusaway_` prefix followed by a consistent verb pattern: find (location search), search (text search), get (retrieve by ID), list (enumerate), plus specific get_schedule_for_route/stop. Naming is entirely snake_case and logically structured.

Tool Count5/5

15 tools cover the full scope of a transit API without bloat: discovery (find/search), details (get), enumeration (list), real-time (arrivals/vehicles/trip), schedules, and alerts. Each tool serves a distinct purpose and fits within a typical well-scoped server.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the primary travel workflows: finding routes/stops by location or name, retrieving full details, real-time arrivals/trip/vehicle tracking, scheduled departures for both routes and stops, service alerts, and agency enumeration. There are no obvious dead ends; each lookup provides IDs for follow-up queries.

Resources