Skip to main content
Glama

find_accessible_toilets

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find wheelchair-accessible toilets near a Tokyo latitude and longitude in public facilities and railway stations. Filter results by ostomate, warm water, universal sheet, and baby changing features.

Instructions

Find nearest listed wheelchair-accessible toilets in Tokyo facilities and railway stations.

Set equipment flags to require every selected feature. A universal sheet is an adult changing
bed, distinct from a baby changing table. Omit source_kind to search both types of location.

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": {
      "latitude": "<latitude>",
      "longitude": "<longitude>"
    },
    "name": "find_accessible_toilets"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
latitudeYes
longitudeYes
source_kindNo
require_ostomateNo
require_universal_sheetNo
require_baby_changing_tableNo
require_ostomate_warm_waterNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive), and the description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: equipment flags are conjunctive ("require every selected feature"), so selecting multiple flags narrows rather than widens results. It also implies results are dataset-limited ("listed") and distance-ordered ("nearest"), which are traits an agent cannot infer from the schema.

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?

Three short sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and the caveats following in priority order; nothing is padded. Minor deductions for awkward mid-sentence line breaks and the slightly clipped phrasing of the equipment-flag sentence.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the description covers the essential decision points: scope, flag conjunction, universal-sheet disambiguation, and source_kind default. Remaining gaps (ostomate terminology, limit/pagination behavior, what "listed" coverage means) are modest for a read-only lookup 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 0% across 8 parameters, so the description carries the load, and it does define the most ambiguous ones: the AND semantics of the require_* flags, the distinction between a universal sheet (adult changing bed) and a baby changing table, and the meaning of omitting source_kind. It leaves require_ostomate and require_ostomate_warm_water entirely undefined, and says nothing about limit or the coordinate parameters.

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 ("Find nearest listed wheelchair-accessible toilets") plus the geographic and source scope ("Tokyo facilities and railway stations"), so an agent knows exactly what will be returned. It stops short of 5 only because there are no sibling tools to differentiate from and it doesn't clarify what "listed" dataset coverage means.

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 by the proximity framing (latitude/longitude are required) and the instruction "Omit source_kind to search both types of location" gives one concrete calling rule. There is no explicit statement of when this tool is or isn't appropriate, but with no sibling alternatives listed there is little to route between.

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