bart_stationsList all BART stations with abbreviation codes and locations. Use this to look up station codes needed by other tools.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| stations | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "stations": {
+ "items": {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "address": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "city": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "code": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "county": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "latitude": {
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "longitude": {
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "state": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "code",
+ "name",
+ "city",
+ "county",
+ "state",
+ "address",
+ "latitude",
+ "longitude"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "stations"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the output content (abbreviation codes and locations) but does not go further (e.g., pagination, ordering). With strong annotation coverage, a 3 is appropriate.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences and front-loaded with the main action ('List all BART stations'). The second sentence provides a clear use case without redundancy. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's simplicity (no params), the presence of an output schema, and strong annotations, the description is complete. It tells the agent what the tool returns (stations with codes and locations) and why to use it (look up codes for other tools). There is no missing context for successful invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty, so schema coverage is 100% by default. Per the rubric, 0 params earns a baseline of 4. The description adds meaning about the output rather than parameters, which is fine since there are no parameters to explain.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses the specific verb "List" and clearly identifies the resource as "all BART stations" with included fields ("abbreviation codes and locations"). It also distinguishes the tool by its role in "look[ing] up station codes needed by other tools," separating it from sibling tools like bart_station_lookup.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly states when to use this tool: "Use this to look up station codes needed by other tools." This provides clear context. However, it does not mention any alternatives or when not to use it, so it doesn't fully meet the "explicit when/when-not/alternatives" bar.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but bart_advisories and bart_status_summary both relate to service status, and bart_trip includes fare information alongside bart_fare. Descriptions help clarify the intended use of each, so the overlap is minor.
All tools consistently use the 'bart_' prefix followed by a descriptive noun phrase in snake_case (e.g., bart_stations, bart_fare, bart_trip). This creates a predictable and uniform naming pattern.
Seven tools is well-scoped for a transit information server, covering station lookup, departures, advisories, fares, and trip planning without unnecessary redundancy or bloat.
The tool set comprehensively covers the core BART transit needs: station discovery, real-time departures, trip planning, fare calculation, and service advisories. No obvious gaps exist for typical transit-related queries.