Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Transita

by io.github.snenenenenenene
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List programme statuses

transita_list_programmes
Read-onlyIdempotent

Intake status of every tracked programme in one country at once: open, paused or closed, the last selection round and cutoff, what is expected next, the official source and the date it was last read. Routes with continuous intake are counted, not listed. Use it before recommending anything in that country.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "country": "<country>"
    },
    "name": "transita_list_programmes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countryYesLowercase destination country code, e.g. 'de', 'ca' or 'uk'. 'gb' also works for the UK.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world). The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior beyond them: routes with continuous intake are counted rather than listed, so the agent knows the output is deliberately incomplete for that category. It does not state volume, ordering, or pagination.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope, then the fields, then the caveat about continuous-intake routes, then the usage cue. The field enumeration is long but every item tells the agent something it can act on; nothing is filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly carries the return-shape burden by enumerating the fields and flagging the continuous-intake exclusion. It falls short on volume/ordering expectations and on disambiguating from transita_programme_status, but everything needed to call it correctly is present.

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?

Only one parameter (country) with 100% schema coverage, including format examples and the 'gb' alias, so the schema does the work. The description adds no further semantics about the parameter (e.g., whether unsupported countries error or return empty), leaving this at the schema-coverage baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names a specific resource (programme intake statuses) and scope (one country, all programmes), and enumerates exactly what is returned: status, last selection round and cutoff, next expected event, source, and read date. It does not differentiate itself from the singular sibling transita_programme_status, which is a real ambiguity for an agent choosing between the two.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Gives one positive directive — 'Use it before recommending anything in that country' — which implies the tool is a prerequisite lookup. There is no when-not guidance and no routing to the near-identical sibling transita_programme_status, so the agent must infer the list-vs-single choice itself.

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

All Transita 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