Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
GPX MCP Server

GPX MCP Server

by gpxco
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List route segments for a shipment

list_shipment_routes
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a shipment's route segments, including each leg between stops, corridor width, and possible routes, to inspect or plan its path.

Instructions

List route segments for a shipment

Returns a shipment's route segments: the leg between two of its stops, the corridor width around it and the routes it may take.

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": {
      "shipmentId": "<shipmentId>"
    },
    "name": "list_shipment_routes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
shipmentIdYesThe shipment id, from `list_shipments`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.3

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower. The description adds genuine context beyond them by describing the shape of what comes back — leg, corridor width, possible routes — which matters because there is no output schema. It does not cover ordering, pagination, or what happens for a shipment with no route yet.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the return semantics; no filler. The opening line largely restates the title, which is mildly redundant but serves as a lead-in.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a one-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage, the description is nearly sufficient — the only real gap is the absence of an output schema and any note on ordering or result size. The bigger miss is disambiguation from get_shipment_route and list_shipment_stops, which an agent will likely weigh when choosing.

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?

There is a single parameter and schema coverage is 100%, with the schema itself stating the id comes from list_shipments. The description adds nothing further about the parameter (no format, no validation, no cross-shipment scoping), so baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource ("List route segments for a shipment") and then defines what a segment actually is: the leg between two stops, its corridor width, and candidate routes. That definitional detail lets an agent distinguish it from a plain stops listing. It stops short of distinguishing it from the sibling get_shipment_route, which sounds like it could return overlapping data.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the close siblings list_shipment_stops or get_shipment_route. The only routing signal is indirect: the schema says the shipmentId comes from list_shipments, which implies a list-then-detail workflow. An agent must infer the rest.

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