chinastay-travel-mcp

Check App Compatibility in China (Hotel Wi-Fi vs Roaming eSIM)

check_china_app_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check if apps such as WhatsApp, Google Maps, or ChatGPT work in Mainland China on hotel Wi-Fi vs roaming eSIM, including verified status, catches, and workarounds.

Instructions

Real-world connectivity dictionary for 66 international & Chinese apps inside Mainland China across TWO distinct networks: domestic hotel Wi-Fi vs international roaming eSIM. Call this whenever users ask whether WhatsApp, Google Maps, ChatGPT, Claude, Instagram, Hinge, Bumble, Spotify, Slack, Alipay, or Uber work in China. Never guess GFW blocking or GPS coordinate offsets—returns verified status, exact catches, workarounds, local alternatives, and https://chinastay.org/app-checker// deep links.

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": "check_china_app_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	No	App name, ID, or keyword (e.g. "WhatsApp", "Google Maps", "ChatGPT", "Hinge", "Bumble", "Uber", "Alipay"). Omit to list all apps or browse a category.
`category`	No	Optional category filter (defaults to "all").

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds useful context beyond them: results are 'verified,' include 'exact catches, workarounds, local alternatives,' and cover two distinct networks, hotel Wi-Fi and roaming eSIM. It does not discuss rate limits or response format, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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 two sentences and front-loads the scope and call trigger. The long list of example apps is purposeful for trigger matching, though it makes the sentence dense; no redundant sentences are present.

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 simple two-optional-param lookup with no output schema, the description adequately explains the return contents: verified status, exact catches, workarounds, local alternatives, and deep links. Nothing critical for correct invocation appears to be 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both the 'query' string and the 'category' enum are already well documented in the input schema. The description adds context that the dictionary covers 66 apps, but it does not add meaning about how the parameters behave beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific resource (a connectivity dictionary covering 66 international and Chinese apps) and precise scope (Mainland China, hotel Wi-Fi vs international roaming eSIM). It is clearly distinguishable from the visa, currency, and driver-card siblings by domain and by the title's 'Check App Compatibility' framing.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this whenever users ask whether WhatsApp, Google Maps, ChatGPT... work in China' and warns 'Never guess GFW blocking or GPS coordinate offsets.' It does not name a when-not case or a direct alternative, but the sibling tools cover different domains, so that omission is low-risk.

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

Deploy Server