OpenVan MCP Server

Toll Road Rates By Country

get_toll_rates

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve toll rates for one country, including motorway per-km charges by vehicle class, vignette prices and durations, payment systems, and toll bridges or tunnels.

Instructions

Toll reference for one country: payment system, per-km rates by vehicle class (car, campervan up to 3.5 t, over 3.5 t), vignette prices for every duration, concession sections and toll bridges/tunnels, each with verification date and source. Use it for toll roads, motorway fees, whether a vignette is needed and what it costs in one country.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`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.
`country_code`	Yes	ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code, e.g. FR.

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

changedInput schema / properties / locale / description

Previous value: -"Language of names: en, ru, de, fr, es, pt, tr."New value: +"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."

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

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds data-provenance context ('each with verification date and source'), which is mildly useful, but says nothing about freshness lag, coverage gaps, or response shape. With annotations carrying most of the burden, a 3 is appropriate.

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 sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns and followed by when to use it. The first sentence is dense but every clause maps to actual returned content, so there is little waste.

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?

For a complex reference tool, the description adequately enumerates the returned data categories (rates by class, vignette durations, concession sections, bridges/tunnels, provenance), and an output schema exists to cover structure. It leaves minor gaps around freshness and coverage but is complete enough to invoke confidently.

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%, with the locale parameter extensively documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter-level detail (e.g. that country_code gates all returned reference data), so it sits at the baseline where the schema does the work.

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 resource ('Toll reference for one country') and enumerates its contents – payment system, per-km rates by vehicle class, vignette prices, concession sections, bridges/tunnels – so the agent knows exactly what it returns. It implicitly contrasts with route-based siblings like estimate_route_tolls by emphasizing single-country reference data, but never names that alternative explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The second sentence gives clear usage context: toll roads, motorway fees, vignette need and cost, scoped to one country. That is enough to route correctly in most cases, but there are no explicit exclusions and no sibling named (e.g. estimate_route_tolls for multi-country route totals), so it stops short of a 5.

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