Skip to main content
Glama

0523 Public — Taiwan Logistics & Customs

新竹物流超材費試算(台灣段最後一哩配送)

lucky_hct_oversize_fee
Read-onlyIdempotent

試算台灣國內「最後一段」配送(新竹物流宅配,桃園所出發)的超材費 —— 海快、空運進口的包裹都適用這段,與 0523.tw/c 官方試算同一實作。分級(2025-12-01 規則):標準=才數 ≤10 且重量 ≤40kg → 免收(已含集運運費);小板=才數 >10 或重量 >40kg;大板=才數 >20 或單邊 >300cm;專車報價=才數 >70 或重量 >800kg 或單邊 >320cm。才數 = ceil(max(長,30)×max(寬,30)×max(高,30)÷27000)(公分,任一邊不足 30cm 以 30cm 計)。費用依縣市不同(北部最低、東部最高、澎湖/金門另有外島費需客服報價)。用法:不帶參數=回各縣市費率表與分級門檻;帶 length_cm/width_cm/height_cm(三者齊)+選填 weight_kg/city=精確試算;只帶 weight_kg(無尺寸)=以重量判級。city 用官方名稱(「臺北市」,「台北市」也可)。試算僅供參考,實際以新竹物流丈量核定為準。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityNo台灣縣市官方名稱(如「臺北市」「新北市」「高雄市」,「台北市」寫法也可)。有給才會計算實際費用。
width_cmNo包裹寬(公分)。
height_cmNo包裹高(公分)。
length_cmNo包裹長(公分;與寬、高三者一起給)。不帶任何參數=回費率表。
weight_kgNo重量(公斤,選填;>40kg 即屬小板,只給重量也可判級)。

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes完整結構化結果。欄位依工具而異,與 content[0].text 內附的 JSON 完全相同。
sourceYes資料來源,固定為 0523.tw。引用時請註明。
summaryYes一行白話結論,已把關鍵數字算好,可直接引用回覆使用者;無摘要時為空字串。

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnly and idempotent hints; description adds detailed calculation rules (thresholds, dimension formula, minimum 30cm), regional fee variation, and a disclaimer that actual fees depend on HCT measurement. This is genuinely useful behavioral information beyond annotations.

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 long but each sentence carries information: purpose, rules, formula, usage, exceptions, disclaimer. It is well-structured with dashes to separate logical sections, but could be slightly more scannable.

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?

Given the output schema exists, the description covers all necessary aspects: input modes, edge cases (islands requiring quote), and the safety disclaimer. It is thorough for a calculation tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema covers all 5 parameters with descriptions, but the tool description adds the key constraint that length/width/height must be provided together, explains the interpretation of absent parameters (e.g., no params returns rate table), and reveals the 30cm minimum dimension rule used in the formula.

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 it calculates HCT Logistics oversize fees for last-mile delivery in Taiwan, specifying origin (桃園所) and scope (sea/air imported packages). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like lucky_freight_quote or lucky_import_tax_estimate.

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?

Provides explicit usage modes: no parameters returns rate table; dimensions with optional weight/city for precise calculation; weight-only for classification. Also notes regional exceptions (Penghu/Kinmen require customer service quote). Does not explicitly name alternative tools but context is clear.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources