Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
12306-mcp

12306-mcp

by Joooook
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript

get-train-route-stations

Retrieve detailed stop information for a specific train, including station names, arrival and departure times, and dwell times. Provide the train code and departure date to get the full route schedule.

Instructions

查询特定列车车次在指定区间内的途径车站、到站时间、出发时间及停留时间等详细经停信息。当用户询问某趟具体列车的经停站时使用此接口。

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": {
      "trainCode": "<trainCode>",
      "departDate": "<departDate>"
    },
    "name": "get-train-route-stations"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formatNo返回结果格式，默认为text，建议使用text。可选标志：[text, json]text
trainCodeYes要查询的车次 `train_code`，例如"G1033"。
departDateYes列车出发的日期 (格式: yyyy-MM-dd)。如果用户提供的是相对日期，请务必先调用 `get-current-date` 解析。

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed7 schema fields changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / departDate / description
      Previous value: -"列车从 `fromStationTelecode` 指定的车站出发的日期 (格式: yyyy-MM-dd)。如果用户提供的是相对日期，请务必先调用 `get-current-date` 解析。"New value: +"列车出发的日期 (格式: yyyy-MM-dd)。如果用户提供的是相对日期，请务必先调用 `get-current-date` 解析。"
    • addedInput schema / properties / format
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "text",
+  "description": "返回结果格式，默认为text，建议使用text。可选标志：[text, json]",
+  "pattern": "^(text|json)$",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / fromStationTelecode
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "该列车行程的**出发站**的 `station_telecode` (3位字母编码`)。通常来自 `get-tickets` 结果中的 `telecode` 字段，或者通过 `get-station-code-by-names` 得到。",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / toStationTelecode
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "该列车行程的**到达站**的 `station_telecode` (3位字母编码)。通常来自 `get-tickets` 结果中的 `telecode` 字段，或者通过 `get-station-code-by-names` 得到。",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / trainCode
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "要查询的车次 `train_code`，例如\"G1033\"。",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / trainNo
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "要查询的实际车次编号 `train_no`，例如 \"240000G10336\"，而非\"G1033\"。此编号通常可以从 `get-tickets` 的查询结果中获取，或者由用户直接提供。",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "trainNo",
-  "fromStationTelecode",
-  "toStationTelecode",
-  "departDate"
-]New value: +[
+  "trainCode",
+  "departDate"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It conveys a read-only query operation ('查询') and explicitly lists the information returned: stations, arrival times, departure times, and dwell times. This is adequate transparency for a simple retrieval tool, though it does not mention failure modes or response formatting.

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 two short, purposeful sentences. The first states the exact query scope and returned fields, and the second gives the practical trigger condition. There is no filler or repetition of schema content.

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?

For a low-complexity read tool with thorough schema documentation, the description tells an agent what the tool does and when to use it. The phrase '指定区间' (specified section) is slightly ambiguous because no interval parameter exists in the schema, but the overall picture is sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage, with clear descriptions for trainCode, departDate, and format, including the date-format instruction to call get-current-date. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states a specific verb ('查询') and a specific resource ('特定列车车次的...途径车站、到站/出发时间及停留时间'), making the tool's purpose unmistakable. It does not explicitly name a sibling tool it is distinct from, though mentioning 'specific train' separates it from the station-code tools in the sibling list.

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?

The description includes an explicit trigger: '当用户询问某趟具体列车的经停站时使用此接口' (use this interface when the user asks about stops for a specific train). It does not provide when-not-to-use guidance or name alternatives such as get-tickets, so it stops short of a 5.

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