MCP Weather & Transit Advisor

get_stop_departures

List upcoming bus and train departures for a stop name or Singapore 5-digit bus stop code, returning live arrivals when available or timetabled times otherwise.

Instructions

List upcoming buses/trains at a public-transport stop.

For a Singapore 5-digit bus stop code (e.g. "83139") this returns LIVE arrivals from LTA DataMall when an LTA key is configured; otherwise it returns timetabled departures from Transitous.

Args: stop: A stop name ("Tampines MRT, Singapore") or a Singapore 5-digit bus stop code ("83139"). limit: Maximum number of departures to list (default 8).

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": {
      "stop": "<stop>"
    },
    "name": "get_stop_departures"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`stop`	Yes
`limit`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden, and it discloses a genuinely non-obvious behavior: a Singapore 5-digit code returns LIVE LTA DataMall arrivals only when an LTA key is configured, otherwise timetabled Transitous departures. That backend/conditioning rule prevents a common misuse (assuming real-time data). Gaps remain: no statement about non-Singapore stop behavior, error cases, or rate limits.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, followed by a compact conditioning rule. The "Args:" block mildly duplicates the schema, but each line adds a concrete format example, so it mostly earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers both the input formats and the source-selection behavior. What is missing is edge-case coverage (invalid/ambiguous stops, non-Singapore names, what happens with no LTA key for a code) for a tool whose output varies by configuration.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it partly does by explaining that stop accepts either a free-text name ("Tampines MRT, Singapore") or a 5-digit Singapore code ("83139"). The limit parameter is only restated with its default 8, with no bounds, unit, or behavior when exceeded.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: "List upcoming buses/trains at a public-transport stop." That is unambiguous and distinguishes it from siblings like get_current_weather and geocode_location, though it never names a sibling or explicitly contrasts with get_commute_advice.

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 description implies usage via the Singapore-code branch (use a 5-digit code for live arrivals, otherwise a stop name), which is a usable routing rule. But it gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no pointer to an alternative tool for other transit needs.

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

Deploy Server