odpt-mcp

search_railway

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find Toei railway stations or lines by Japanese or English name, with options to filter by kind and limit results.

Instructions

Find stations or railway lines operated by Toei, by Japanese or English name.

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": {
      "kind": "<kind>"
    },
    "name": "search_railway"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	Yes
`limit`	No
`query`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world behavior, so the description's job is lighter. It adds the useful Toei-only scope and multilingual matching, but says nothing about result caps, pagination, or empty-result behavior for a search tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity comes at the cost of the parameter and behavior detail noted elsewhere.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and annotations cover the safety profile. For a three-parameter lookup tool, scope, language support, and entity type are the essentials, and they are present, though limit and null-query semantics remain thin.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries full burden, yet it only sheds light on 'query' (Japanese or English name matching). The 'kind' enum, the 'limit' default of 10 with a maximum of 50, and the meaning of a null query are all left undocumented.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Find stations or railway lines') and narrows the scope to Toei-operated entities. Siblings are fare/timetable/status tools, so the resource is easily distinguished, though no sibling is named explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied: use it to look up a station or line by name. There is no statement about when not to use it, and no explanation of the required 'kind' selector or what happens when 'query' is omitted (listing vs. searching), which is exactly the ambiguity an agent needs resolved.

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

Deploy Server