Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
鉄道駅LOD MCPサーバー

鉄道駅LOD MCPサーバー

by uedayou
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

緯度経度から最寄り駅を検索

find_nearest_stations

Finds nearby Japanese railway stations by latitude and longitude, returning them in distance order for reverse geocoding and location-based station lookup.

Instructions

指定した緯度経度に近い駅を距離順で返す(逆ジオコーディング)。会社・路線ごとに別エンティティのため、同一物理駅が複数件返ることがある。

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": {
      "lat": "<lat>",
      "long": "<long>"
    },
    "name": "find_nearest_stations"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latYes緯度(10進)。
longYes経度(10進)。
limitNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.2

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses distance ordering and the important caveat that the same physical station may appear multiple times because of company/line entities, but it omits return fields, distance units, and whether limit truncates the nearest set.

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?

Two tightly written sentences with the core behavior front-loaded and the duplicate-entity caveat immediately following. There is no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a three-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the duplicate caveat is valuable, but the definition is still incomplete about the response shape and the effect of limit. An agent knows the general purpose but not fully what it will receive.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The description refers only to the input coordinates and adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. The limit parameter has no schema description, and with 67% schema coverage the description does not compensate for that gap.

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 states a specific action and resource: returns stations near a given latitude/longitude in distance order, and labels it reverse geocoding. It is clear enough to distinguish from line- or network-oriented siblings, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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 reverse-geocoding framing implies the tool is for coordinate-to-station lookup, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative such as search_railway for name-based lookup.

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