openbusdata

SIRI_VM_Data_feed_api_v1_datafeed_by_datafeedID

Retrieve a single bus data feed by its unique ID to access specific timetable or real-time information from the UK Bus Open Data Service.

Instructions

Returns a single datafeed

Parameters: datafeedID (required): Limit results to a specific data feed of a publisher using the data feed ID.

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": {
      "kwargs": "<kwargs>"
    },
    "name": "SIRI_VM_Data_feed_api_v1_datafeed_by_datafeedID"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kwargs`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.2Jul 6, 2026

TDQS

C2.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It only says 'Returns a single datafeed' without disclosing read-only nature, error handling, authentication, or rate limits. Minimal transparency for a read operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very short, with a header and parameter explanation. It is concise but the parameter section is misplaced and inaccurate. No extraneous content, but structure could be improved by aligning with the schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complex tool name and sibling context, the description lacks completeness. It does not distinguish from similar tools (list vs. single), does not address error conditions, and the parameter mismatch leaves gaps. An output schema exists but is not described.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The description mentions 'datafeedID' as a required parameter, but the input schema only has 'kwargs' with no description. This mismatch misleads the agent about how to invoke the tool. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description fails to accurately map to the actual parameter.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states 'Returns a single datafeed', which is a clear verb+resource. However, the parameter naming mismatch (datafeedID vs kwargs) undermines clarity. The sibling tool SIRI_VM_Data_feed_api_v1_datafeed likely lists all, so specifying 'single' helps, but the discrepancy reduces score.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use vs. alternatives like the list datafeed tool. Does not mention that it requires a specific datafeedID or that it's for retrieving a single item by ID. No exclusions or context provided.

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

Deploy Server