Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
neshan-mcp

neshan-mcp

by sepehr071
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Neshan place details

ns_place
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve full details for a single Neshan place by ID or map link, including address, coordinates, phone numbers, website, rating, opening hours, and photo URLs.

Instructions

Get one place's details on Neshan: address, coordinates, phones, website, rating, opening hours and photos.

Use after ns_search. open is Neshan's status text (باز است = open, بسته است = closed). photos holds the 5 newest photo URLs; photo_categories lists albums (e.g. menu) for ns_photos. Reviews: ns_reviews.

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": {
      "place_id": "<place_id>"
    },
    "name": "ns_place"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
place_idYesPlace `id` from ns_search (32 hex chars), or a neshan.org/maps/places/... link.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, open-world and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious context: that `open` is Persian status text with its two possible meanings, that `photos` returns only the 5 newest URLs, and that `photo_categories` is an album list. Rate limits and failure modes for a bad place_id are not covered.

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?

The purpose and returned fields are front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by a compact workflow pointer and field-level clarifications. Every clause carries information an agent would otherwise have to guess, with no filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully explains the non-obvious return fields (`open`, `photos`, `photo_categories`) and routes reviews elsewhere, which is enough to call and interpret the tool. It could go slightly further on what happens with an invalid or expired place_id.

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% and the single place_id parameter already documents both the 32-hex-char id and the neshan.org link alternative. The description adds nothing about the parameter itself, so the baseline of 3 applies; its value lies in return-field semantics instead.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one place's details on Neshan') and enumerates the returned fields: address, coordinates, phones, website, rating, opening hours and photos. It also differentiates itself from siblings by positioning after ns_search and delegating reviews and albums to ns_reviews and ns_photos.

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?

'Use after ns_search' gives explicit sequencing context, and the pointers to ns_photos and ns_reviews tell the agent where to go for adjacent data. It stops short of stating exclusions (e.g., when to prefer ns_nearby or ns_zone_check), so it is clear context rather than a full when/when-not matrix.

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