MBTA MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

mbta_get_routes

Retrieve MBTA routes. Optionally filter by route ID, type (light rail, subway, commuter rail, bus, ferry), or limit results.

Instructions

Get MBTA routes. Optionally filter by route ID or type.

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": "mbta_get_routes"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`route_id`	No	Specific route ID to get
`route_type`	No	Filter by route type (0=Light Rail, 1=Subway, 2=Commuter Rail, 3=Bus, 4=Ferry)
`page_limit`	No	Number of results to return (default: 10)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0May 26, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, side effects, or response details. The name implies a read operation, but this is not stated.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is concise but could include more detail without sacrificing brevity.

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 three parameters and no output schema, the description lacks essential context about return format, pagination behavior, or filtering semantics. Minimal completeness for a tool in a large sibling set.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description adds no new meaning beyond the parameter descriptions. It restates 'optionally filter by route ID or type', which is redundant.

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 'Get MBTA routes' with optional filtering by route ID or type. It distinguishes from sibling 'mbta_list_all_routes' which likely lists all routes without filtering, so purpose is clear but could be more specific.

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 this tool versus alternatives like 'mbta_list_all_routes'. With many sibling tools, explicit usage context is missing.

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