UK Data for Agents

river_stations_on_river

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists the Environment Agency level gauges on a named river in England (for example River Thames or River Severn) with station ids, towns and coordinates. Useful for boaters planning a trip or anyone following a river downstream. Source: Environment Agency real-time flood-monitoring API. The upstream name match is exact, so if nothing matches the tool retries once as "River " in title case (e.g. "thames" becomes "River Thames") and reports the name it used; other spellings are not guessed, and the list is not in upstream-to-downstream order. (cost: 1 credit)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "river_stations_on_river"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	integer, optional, max stations returned, 1-100, default 25
`river_name`	No	string, required, river name as the Environment Agency writes it, e.g. River Thames; "thames" or "river thames" is retried as "River Thames"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, open-world, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, and the description adds material operational context: the Environment Agency source, a 1-credit cost, exact-name matching with one 'River <Name>' retry, reporting of the resolved name, no spelling guessing, and non-downstream ordering. These are real behavioral traits beyond the 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 definition is front-loaded with the resource and return fields, then adds matching caveats and cost; every sentence carries operational information. It is somewhat dense, and 'upstream name match' versus 'upstream-to-downstream order' uses 'upstream' in two senses, but there is little outright waste.

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?

For a two-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the description is complete: it identifies the source, return fields, matching behavior, ordering caveat, and cost. The limit/pagination detail is already in the schema, so nothing critical is missing.

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?

With schema description coverage at 100%, the baseline is 3, and the description largely reinforces rather than extends the schema's river_name guidance (exact EA spelling, retry examples). It adds 'reports the name it used' and the no-guessing caveat, but says nothing extra about limit, so it is useful but not a major semantic addition.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource—'Lists the Environment Agency level gauges on a named river in England'—and names the returned fields: station ids, towns and coordinates. That is enough to distinguish it from sibling river-level tools, which report readings or flow rather than a station inventory.

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?

It supplies a concrete use case ('boaters planning a trip or anyone following a river downstream') and explains the matching limitation and retry, but it never explicitly names alternatives or says when to choose river_level_now or river_flow_now instead. The intended context is clear; exclusions and sibling routing are left implicit.

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

All UK Data for Agents tools Inspect

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

Need Help?