Skip to main content
Glama

ShippingRates MCP Server

by io.github.vinaybhosle

Published Freight Benchmarks

shippingrates_rates
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get current certified freight benchmark observations between two ports, optionally filtered by container type.

These are official published market indices, not carrier spot quotes or contracted rates. An unsupported lane returns an empty rates array. For a published multi-component estimate, use shippingrates_total_cost and inspect its coverage, data_gaps, and total_is_partial fields.

PAID: $0.03/call via x402 (USDC on Base or Solana). Without payment, returns 402 with payment instructions.

Returns: { route, rates: [{ trade_lane_name, origin_port, origin_region, destination_port, destination_region, container_type, rate_low, rate_mid, rate_high, currency, index_source, trend, week_over_week_change_pct, rate_date }], carriers, transit_days_min, transit_days_max, rate_low?, rate_mid?, rate_high?, trend?, currency? }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
originYesOrigin port UN/LOCODE — e.g. INNSA (Nhava Sheva), CNSHA (Shanghai), SGSIN (Singapore)
x_paymentNox402 payment proof header
destinationYesDestination port UN/LOCODE — e.g. AEJEA (Jebel Ali), NLRTM (Rotterdam), USNYC (New York)
container_typeNoContainer type filter — e.g. 20DV, 40HC, 20RF

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / container_type / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "20DV",
-  "40DV",
-  "40HC",
-  "20RF",
-  "40RF",
-  "20OT",
-  "40OT",
-  "20FR",
-  "40FR"
-]New value: +[
+  "20GP",
+  "40GP",
+  "40HC",
+  "20RF",
+  "40RF",
+  "20OT",
+  "40OT",
+  "45HC",
+  "40FR",
+  "20FR",
+  "40DG",
+  "20DG",
+  "45RF",
+  "45OT",
+  "45DG",
+  "40TK",
+  "20TK",
+  "45GP",
+  "45TK",
+  "40NOR"
+]
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / container_type / description
      Previous value: -"Container type filter"New value: +"Container type filter — e.g. 20DV, 40HC, 20RF"
    • changedInput schema / properties / destination / description
      Previous value: -"Destination port UN/LOCODE"New value: +"Destination port UN/LOCODE — e.g. AEJEA (Jebel Ali), NLRTM (Rotterdam), USNYC (New York)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / origin / description
      Previous value: -"Origin port UN/LOCODE"New value: +"Origin port UN/LOCODE — e.g. INNSA (Nhava Sheva), CNSHA (Shanghai), SGSIN (Singapore)"
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses important behavioral traits beyond the annotations: unsupported lanes return an empty array, payment is required via x402, and failure without payment yields a 402 with instructions. It also clarifies what the tool does not return (spot quotes). This adds value over the readOnly/idempotent hints.

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?

The description is organized into logical blocks: purpose, differentiation, payment, and return format. Each sentence adds essential information, though it is longer than strictly necessary. The return type outline is helpful but could be trimmed slightly without losing value.

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?

The description covers key context: lane support, payment requirements, error behavior, and the response structure. With no output schema, it provides a useful return format sketch. It could mention how to handle invalid port codes, but overall it is sufficiently complete for a tool of this complexity.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, with each parameter having descriptive text and examples. The description reiterates the container type filter but adds no new parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the load.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves certified freight benchmark observations between two ports with optional container type filtering. It explicitly distinguishes these from carrier spot quotes or contracted rates and references a sibling tool for multi-component estimates, making the purpose unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It provides explicit when-to-use guidance by noting these are official published indices, not spot quotes, and directs users to shippingrates_total_cost for multi-component estimates. It also explains behavior on unsupported lanes (empty rates array), which helps set expectations.

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

All ShippingRates 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

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: D&D calculator/compare/countdown, inland search/haulage/compare, and congestion/news/risk are well separated. However, the transit/vessel group (transit, transit_schedules, vessel_schedule, vessel_schedule_options) and rates vs total_cost could cause some selection ambiguity, though descriptions help differentiate them.

Naming Consistency3/5

All tools share the 'shippingrates_' prefix and snake_case, but naming patterns vary: some are action-oriented (shippingrates_dd_calculate, shippingrates_inland_compare), while others are noun phrases (shippingrates_surcharges, shippingrates_port, shippingrates_total_cost). This inconsistency could make it harder to predict tool names.

Tool Count3/5

With 26 tools, the server is on the heavier side, exceeding the typical 15-tool comfort zone. However, the broad domain of shipping rates, logistics, and regulatory data justifies the number, as each tool covers a distinct aspect. Still, the volume may overwhelm agents.

Completeness5/5

The tool set is remarkably comprehensive for a shipping rates server, covering freight benchmarks, surcharges, local charges, D&D (calculate/compare/countdown), inland haulage, transit schedules, vessel schedules, congestion, risk scoring, regulatory updates, facilities, FX, and a composite total-cost calculator. No obvious gaps for common logistics cost-analysis workflows.

Resources