Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-french-transport-data

mcp-french-transport-data

by Hug0x0
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

french_transport_data_get_sources

List the curated sources behind the French transport data MCP, providing access to datasets, GTFS resources, and quality information.

Instructions

List curated sources used by this MCP.

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": "french_transport_data_get_sources"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List curated sources' – implying a read operation, but gives no details on return format, size, or whether it returns identifiers or full metadata. This is insufficient for an agent to know what to expect.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately states the action and the object, so it earns a perfect conciseness score.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given its simplicity (no inputs, no output schema), the description is nearly complete. However, it lacks context on what 'curated sources' are, and doesn't mention any use cases or limitations. An agent might call it without understanding the value of the returned data.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline score of 4 applies. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and it doesn't.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'List curated sources'. It is distinct from sibling tools that fetch excerpts, search datasets, or retrieve specific datasets. However, it doesn't clarify what 'sources' means (e.g., data provider names, file names), leaving slight ambiguity.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that other tools handle searches or excerpts, or that this tool provides an overview of available data. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools