OpenVan MCP Server

Visa Rules For A Route

get_route_visa_rules

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve visa rules for every country on a travel route in one call, covering up to 10 passports and flagging the tightest leg.

Instructions

Visa rules for every country of a route in one call, for up to 10 passports at once, plus the tightest leg of the route.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`locale`	No	Language the user writes in (en, ru, de, fr, es, pt, tr). Set it on every call: the answer and the interactive card are shown in this language and units; without it the card falls back to the app's interface language.
`weight`	No	Vehicle weight class for the vehicle rules.
`countries`	Yes	Countries in travel order, comma separated ISO alpha-2 codes or slugs, up to 12, e.g. RU,GE,TR.
`passports`	No	Passports to answer for, comma separated, up to 10, e.g. RU,BY.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.9.7Oct 25, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -trueNew value: +{}
```

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.6.4Oct 15, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / locale

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Language the user writes in (en, ru, de, fr, es, pt, tr). Set it on every call: the answer and the interactive card are shown in this language and units; without it the card falls back to the app's interface language.",
+  "enum": [
+    "en",
+    "ru",
+    "de",
+    "fr",
+    "es",
+    "pt",
+    "tr"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {},
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.6.0Oct 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description contributes one extra behavioral fact — that the result includes 'the tightest leg of the route' alongside per-country rules — but says nothing about rate limits, error behavior for unsupported passports, or partial-route coverage, so it is helpful but thin beyond the annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

A single sentence with zero waste that front-loads what is returned and what makes it special (route-wide coverage, batched passports, tightest leg). Nothing is repeated from the schema and no filler is present.

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?

The tool is read-only with a full output schema and completely described parameters, so the description only has to establish purpose and scale — which it does. The remaining gaps are the unstated country cap (12 in schema vs 10 passports stated) and the absence of routing guidance versus check_visa_rules, both minor given the rich schema and annotations.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the locale parameter carries unusually rich guidance (set on every call, affects answer language and units, fallback behavior), so the structured data already does the heavy lifting. The description adds only the passports cap ('up to 10'), which matches the schema, and says nothing about the weight or locale parameters, making this a baseline-plus score rather than a value-add.

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 the resource precisely (visa rules per country along a route) and adds real scope detail: multi-country in one call and up to 10 passports. It implicitly separates itself from check_visa_rules by emphasizing the batch/route case, but never names that sibling, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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 only implied: 'one call' and 'for up to 10 passports' signal the multi-passport, multi-country scenario. There is no explicit when-to-use / when-not-to-use statement, no prerequisite (e.g. passports required to get a meaningful answer), and no pointer to check_visa_rules for a single country.

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