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

鉄道の駅・路線・事業者を検索

search_railway

Search Japanese railway stations, lines, and operators by partial name or alias, filter by kind, and normalize variants such as JR East vs East Japan Railway; use returned URIs for geometry.

Instructions

鉄道駅LOD を使って、駅・路線・鉄道事業者をラベル(および別名)の部分一致で検索する。kind で種別を絞り込める。事業者名の表記ゆれ(「JR東日本」⇔「東日本旅客鉄道」)や「〜本線」⇔「〜線」を吸収する。位置や形状が必要な場合は結果の uri を get_railway_geometry に渡す。

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_railway"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNo種別で絞り込む(station=駅 / line=路線 / operator=事業者)。未指定は全種別。
limitNo
queryYes検索語(駅名・路線名・事業者名の一部)。略称・旧称などの別名も対象。

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.2

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the disclosure burden and does well: it reveals that matching is partial and alias-aware, and that notation variants (JR東日本 ⇔ 東日本旅客鉄道, 〜本線 ⇔ 〜線) are normalized, which materially changes how an agent should phrase queries. It omits return shape beyond uri, pagination behaviour, and any auth/rate-limit notes, so it is not fully transparent.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with purpose then narrowing to matching semantics and the follow-up tool. Every sentence contributes information an agent needs; nothing is redundant.

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 three-parameter search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, filtering, fuzzy-matching semantics, and the next step after getting a uri. The main gap is that it never says what a result record contains beyond uri, which matters because there is no output schema.

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 67%, and the description adds real meaning for `query` by explaining that variant spellings and 〜本線/〜線 differences are absorbed, beyond the schema's brief note about aliases. `kind` and `limit` are left to the schema (limit is undocumented anywhere), keeping this below a 5.

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 gives a specific verb (検索する) plus the three resources it covers (駅・路線・鉄道事業者), the data source (鉄道駅LOD), and the matching mode (ラベルの部分一致). An agent can distinguish it from siblings such as get_railway_geometry or find_nearest_stations without opening any schema.

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?

It states the condition for use (name-based lookup) and routes the agent elsewhere when geometry or location is needed, explicitly naming get_railway_geometry and the handoff value (uri). It does not cover other plausible alternatives (nearest-station lookup, network path), so it falls short of a full when/when-not map.

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