Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
bus-scheduling-mcp

bus-scheduling-mcp

by uwmyuan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

scheduling_get_gantt_data

Retrieve scheduling plan tasks as Gantt chart data using a dataset or plan ID, enabling visualization and analysis of task timelines.

Instructions

Get plan tasks formatted as Gantt chart data by dataset or plan ID.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "scheduling_get_gantt_data"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
plan_idNo
dataset_idNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It indicates a read-only operation ('Get') but does not clarify what happens when both or neither ID is provided, the structure of the returned Gantt data, or any pagination/formatting behavior.

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 description is a single, clear sentence that immediately conveys the core function. It is appropriately concise with no wasted words.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given no output schema, annotations, or parameter descriptions, the tool's full behavior is under-specified. The agent is left without knowledge of what the Gantt data contains, what the response looks like, or how to handle ambiguous inputs.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description needs to compensate. It states the parameters are 'dataset or plan ID' but does not specify whether they are alternatives, required, or how they interact. This adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's bare type strings.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies a clear resource ('plan tasks formatted as Gantt chart data') with explicit access paths ('by dataset or plan ID'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like scheduling_get_route_details or scheduling_list_plans by focusing on Gantt chart data.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not explain prerequisites (e.g., need to have a plan or dataset ID first), whether to prefer one ID over another, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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