Skip to main content
Glama
slettmayer

oebb-mcp-server

by slettmayer
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

service_alerts

Fetch active OeBB service alerts and disruptions with headlines, descriptions, affected stations, and date ranges. Filter by product type and limit count.

Instructions

Fetch current OeBB service alerts and disruptions.

Returns active alerts with headlines, descriptions, affected stations,
and date ranges.

Args:
    max_alerts: Maximum number of alerts to return (default 20)
    product_filter: Product bitmask — 1=ICE/RJX, 2=IC/EC, 4=NJ,
        8=D/EN, 16=REX/R, 32=S-Bahn, 64=Bus,
        4096=private operators (Westbahn/RegioJet), 65535=all

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
max_alertsNo
product_filterNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states that the tool returns active alerts with headlines, descriptions, affected stations, and date ranges, but it does not mention pagination, sorting, or any potential side effects. For a read-only fetch, this is adequate but not thorough.

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?

The description is well-structured, starting with a clear purpose, then a brief summary of return fields, and ending with parameter details. The bitmask list is lengthy but necessary for usability.

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?

Because an output schema exists, the description need not detail return values, but it still summarizes them helpfully. The parameter semantics and purpose give enough context to invoke the tool correctly, though there is some room to mention behavior like result ordering or time windows.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The Args section fully explains both parameters despite the schema having 0% description coverage. It defines max_alerts as a limit and provides a complete product_filter bitmask with numeric values, which is essential for correct invocation.

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?

The description opens with 'Fetch current OeBB service alerts and disruptions,' using a specific verb and resource. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools, which handle station search, station boards, and trip search.

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?

The purpose implies when to use the tool, but there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or how it compares to alternatives. The sibling tools are semantically distinct, so the intended context is mostly clear without further explanation.

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

Install Server

Other Tools