ourpr.

Get a course's line

ourpr_get_course_route

Read-onlyIdempotent

Where a course actually runs: its start, its finish, its bounding box, every mile marker, and the streets in the order you meet them.

The GPX file is free and needs no account. Hand gpx_url to a person who wants the course on a watch.

Args:

slug (string): From ourpr_list_courses.
include_polyline (boolean): Add the encoded centerline, about 9,800 characters. Default false.
response_format ('markdown' | 'json'): Default 'markdown'.

Returns: { "slug": string, "name": string, "course_type": string, "distance_mi": number, "start": { "lat": number, "lng": number } | null, "finish": { "lat": number, "lng": number } | null, "bbox": { "min_lat": number, "min_lng": number, "max_lat": number, "max_lng": number } | null, "mile_markers": [{ "mile": number, "lat": number, "lng": number }], "streets_in_order": [{ "name": string, "from_mi": number, "to_mi": number }], "polyline": string | null, "gpx_url": string, "page_url": string }

On an out-and-back the start and the finish are the same point, by design.

Examples:

"Send me the Boston course for my watch" -> read gpx_url
"What streets does Dallas run down?" -> read streets_in_order
"Where does Honolulu start?" -> read start

Error handling:

Returns the slug list suggestion when the slug is unknown.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes	The course's slug.
`response_format`	No	Output format. 'markdown' reads well in a chat answer. 'json' carries every field for further computation.	markdown
`include_polyline`	No	Add the encoded centerline. It runs to about 9,800 characters and only helps if you will decode it. Leave it off and hand over `gpx_url` instead.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`bbox`	Yes
`name`	Yes
`slug`	Yes
`start`	Yes
`finish`	Yes
`gpx_url`	Yes
`page_url`	Yes
`polyline`	Yes
`course_type`	Yes
`distance_mi`	Yes
`mile_markers`	Yes
`streets_in_order`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that the GPX file is free and requires no account, and notes that on out-and-back courses start and finish coincide. It also discloses error behavior (returns slug list on unknown slug). These are valuable behavioral details beyond annotations, though rate limits are not mentioned.

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 well-organized with sections for purpose, args, returns, examples, and error handling. Every sentence adds value, from the GPX note to the out-and-back edge case. It is efficient and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 includes an inline return schema, examples, error handling, and an edge case. For a read-only tool with three parameters and annotations covering safety, this is comprehensive. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 provenance for slug ('From ourpr_list_courses') and clarifies the polyline's size and when to use it. The response_format guidance (markdown for chat, json for computation) adds meaning beyond the enum definition.

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 opens with a precise statement of what the tool returns: start, finish, bounding box, mile markers, and streets in order. This clearly identifies the course route as the resource and distinguishes it from sibling tools like amenities or terrain. The title 'Get a course's line' reinforces the purpose.

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 includes concrete examples mapping natural-language queries to output fields (e.g., 'Send me the Boston course for my watch' -> gpx_url). However, it does not explicitly contrast this tool with siblings like ourpr_get_course_amenities or ourpr_get_course_terrain, leaving routing to inference. The examples provide useful context but lack explicit exclusions.

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

All ourpr. 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?