Skip to main content
Glama
Ocean-Ch

google-maps-transit

by Ocean-Ch
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

compare_commutes

compare_commutes
Read-only

Compare commute times from 2–5 addresses to one shared destination, ranked by route duration using Google Maps data.

Instructions

Compares commute times from multiple candidate origins to a single shared destination using real-time Google Maps data.

        Perfect for questions like:
        • "Which of these 3 apartments has the best commute to my office?"
        • "I'm considering moving to Brooklyn, Queens, or Jersey City — which is fastest to Midtown?"
        • "Compare driving vs. transit isn't needed — just rank these addresses by commute time."

        Accepts 2–5 origin addresses. Returns them ranked fastest → slowest, each with the best
        available route (duration, distance, transit lines, traffic-aware driving time, etc.).
        Failed lookups for individual origins are surfaced as errors in-line rather than aborting the whole comparison.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNoTransport mode for all comparisons. Default: transit.
originsYesList of 2–5 candidate origin addresses to compare, e.g. ['123 Main St, Brooklyn, NY', '456 Elm Ave, Queens, NY'].
avoid_tollsNoWhen true, instructs Google Maps to avoid toll roads where possible. Applies to driving and two_wheeler modes.
destinationYesThe shared destination address all origins will be compared against.
departure_timeNoISO 8601 departure datetime shared across all comparisons. Defaults to 1 minute from now.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeYes
resultsYesOrigins ranked by fastest commute time (failed lookups appear last with rank: null)
destinationYesThe shared destination address

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation that may interact with external systems. The description adds useful behavioral context: it accepts 2–5 origins, returns them ranked fastest to slowest with best available route details (duration, distance, transit lines, traffic-aware driving time), and handles individual lookup failures gracefully by surfacing errors in-line rather than aborting the whole comparison. This goes 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 description is front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by example questions and behavioral notes. While the example section is useful, it could be slightly more concise. However, it remains focused and avoids unnecessary repetition.

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?

The description is complete for an agent to call the tool correctly: it explains the input range (2–5 origins), output format (ranked list with route details), error handling, and use cases. An output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed, but the description still provides enough behavioral context to be self-sufficient. Minor gap: no explicit mention of rate limits or authentication needs, which are unlikely for a read-only comparison tool.

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 all parameters (mode, origins, avoid_tolls, destination, departure_time) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides, such as address formatting or departure time format. When schema coverage is high, a 3 is the baseline.

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 verb (compares) and resource (commute times), and precisely scopes the operation: multiple candidate origins to a single shared destination using real-time Google Maps data. It distinguishes itself from the sibling get_transit_commute by handling multiple origins and ranking them, rather than a point-to-point lookup.

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 gives clear context through example questions, showing exactly when to use it (ranking apartments by commute, comparing neighborhoods). It also clarifies what the tool does NOT do: 'Compare driving vs. transit isn't needed — just rank these addresses by commute time.' However, it doesn't explicitly name the sibling get_transit_commute or state when to use that alternative.

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