Skip to main content
Glama
fastmcp-me

OpenDataMCP

by fastmcp-me

rail-traffic-info

Fetch rail traffic alerts and disruptions with filters for language, time range, and location to keep travelers informed.

Instructions

Fetch rail traffic information

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
langNoLanguage code for responses (de, fr, it, en). Affects message content language
limitNoMaximum number of traffic info entries to return (1-100)
whereNoFilter conditions for traffic info. Examples: 'validitybegin >= NOW()', 'description LIKE "*Zürich*"'
offsetNoNumber of traffic info entries to skip for pagination
refineNoRefine by specific facets. Example: 'author:SBB' to show only SBB notifications
selectNoFields to select in the response. Examples: 'title,description' for basic info, 'title,validitybegin,validityend' for timing info
excludeNoExclude specific fields from response. Example: 'description_html' to exclude HTML formatting
group_byNoGroup traffic info by specific fields. Example: 'author' to group by the author of the traffic info
order_byNoSort traffic info. Example: 'validitybegin ASC' for chronological order, 'published DESC' for newest first
timezoneNoTimezone for validity and publication times. Example: 'Europe/Zurich' for local Swiss timeUTC
include_linksNoInclude related links in response
include_app_metasNoInclude application metadata

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'fetch', implying a read operation, but does not describe response format, pagination behavior, or potential side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with 12 parameters.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is a single sentence with no waste, but it is under-specified for a tool of this complexity. It does not provide an overview of capabilities or structure the information in a way that helps an agent quickly understand the tool's scope.

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

Completeness1/5

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

The description is completely inadequate for a tool with 12 optional parameters and no output schema or annotations. It does not synthesize the parameter capabilities (filtering, pagination, language, timezone) or provide any contextual hints, leaving the agent to rely entirely on the schema.

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%, meaning each of the 12 parameters has a description in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter information, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already documents all parameters clearly.

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 'Fetch rail traffic information' provides a clear verb and resource, distinguishing the tool from siblings like railway-lines and rolling-stock. However, it does not specify what constitutes 'traffic information' (e.g., delays, disruptions), leaving some 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. The description does not mention any context or conditions that would lead an agent to select this over railway-lines or rolling-stock, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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