Skip to main content
Glama

Imf Portwatch

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Chokepoint Status

chokepoint_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Chokepoint traffic status for one maritime chokepoint: the most recent settled day of vessel transits scored against a trailing baseline, so an agent can tell at a glance whether shipping through that strait or canal is above, below, or at its normal run rate. Answers "is shipping through the Strait of Hormuz down", "Suez Canal transit volume this week", "Panama Canal ship counts vs normal", "maritime chokepoint disruption check", "tanker traffic anomaly at Bab el-Mandeb". Returns the latest day (total vessels, per-vessel-type counts, aggregate capacity in deadweight tonnage), data_lag_days plus a freshness_note, the baseline mean with delta / percent deviation / direction (above, below, normal), 7-day and 30-day means, the same percent deviation per vessel type (tanker, container, dry_bulk, general_cargo, roro — a tanker-only drop at Hormuz is the tradeable signal), and the min and max daily total in the window with their dates. Source is IMF PortWatch daily AIS-derived transit counts, published with a multi-day lag, so the "latest" day is the most recent settled day rather than a live count. Accepts forgiving names — "Hormuz", "Strait of Hormuz", "hormuz", "Suez", "Panama", "Bab el-Mandeb", "Malacca", "Taiwan", "Bosphorus", "Gibraltar", "Dover" — or a PortWatch portid like "chokepoint6". Examples: chokepoint_status({chokepoint: "Hormuz"}); chokepoint_status({chokepoint: "Suez Canal", baseline_days: 30}); chokepoint_status({chokepoint: "Panama"}).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chokepointYesChokepoint name, alias, or portid — e.g. "Hormuz", "Strait of Hormuz", "Suez Canal", "Bab el-Mandeb", "chokepoint6"
baseline_daysNoLength of the trailing baseline window in days, measured backward from the day before the latest settled day (default 90, min 7, max 364).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "chokepoint": "Hormuz"
+  },
+  {
+    "baseline_days": 30,
+    "chokepoint": "Suez Canal"
+  }
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint. Description adds data source (IMF PortWatch with multi-day lag), freshness_note, and lists exact return fields. No contradictions.

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?

Long but well-structured: front-loaded purpose, then details, then examples. Each sentence provides value. Could be slightly tighter but still concise for the information density.

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?

No output schema, so description fully explains return fields (vessel counts, DWT, data_lag, baseline stats, per-type deviation, min/max). Also covers source and lag. Complete for a read-only 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 coverage is 100% so baseline is 3. Description adds alias examples, default/range for baseline_days, and explains the trailing window. Provides useful examples beyond 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?

Description clearly states tool returns chokepoint traffic status compared to a baseline, distinguishing it from siblings like chokepoint_compare. It includes specific verbs ('answers') and examples of queries.

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?

Example queries like 'is shipping through the Strait of Hormuz down' show when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives among siblings.

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

All Imf Portwatch 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
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear distinct purposes, but the three ask_pipeworx variants (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded) are very similar, and there is some overlap between bet_research and polymarket_edges. Overall, the majority are well-differentiated.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern with only minor deviations (e.g., 'chokepoints_list' vs 'chokepoint_daily_traffic'). The naming convention is predictable and clear.

Tool Count2/5

At 37 tools, the surface is overly large for a focused server. Many tools are meta-tools that could have been consolidated, and the count exceeds the recommended range (25+), making it feel heavy and unwieldy.

Completeness5/5

The server covers maritime chokepoints comprehensively (list, status, daily, compare, disruptions), and the Pipeworx-based tools provide broad coverage across financial, drug, prediction market, and general query domains. There are no obvious gaps for the stated scope.

Resources