Lviv Timetable MCP

Quick Verdict

Lviv Timetable MCP is the read-only Model Context Protocol surface in timetable-api-node 1.3.4. The production Streamable HTTP endpoint is https://api.lad.lviv.ua/mcp, alongside a public REST API. Its deterministic tools query stop arrivals, static and realtime routes, stop geometry, nearby stops and vehicles, individual vehicle details, and static direct or one-transfer trip options. The public MCP requires no API key, exposes no mutation tools, and applies an in-memory limit of 60 requests per minute per IP.

It is useful for MCP learning, Lviv transport prototypes, and low-risk personal travel assistance. It is not a transport-operator guarantee. Results combine local timetable data, GTFS storage, and GTFS-RT upstreams; source delays, devices, caches, imports, and service restarts affect freshness. The repository’s WTFPL license covers code, not automatically GTFS records, maps, stop and route names, operator marks, or vehicle information.

Best For

• Developers learning how static and realtime transport data can become bounded MCP tools.
• Teams prototyping Lviv stop, route, vehicle, and nearby queries in Claude, Cursor, or a custom client.
• Engineers prepared to show timestamps, handle 429 and empty results, and review upstream data terms.
• It is not appropriate for guaranteed arrivals, global routing, official fares, accessibility commitments, emergency travel, or unattended dispatch.

Key Features

• Deterministic read-only MCP: The public Streamable HTTP endpoint offers query tools and no data mutations.
• Eight transport tools: Stop arrivals, static and realtime routes, stop geometry, nearby stops, nearby vehicles, vehicle details, and trip planning.
• Structured responses: Tools return a text summary plus structuredContent, with optional map and arrival-list ui_blocks.
• GTFS plus GTFS-RT: Static routes, stops, and schedules combine with upstream live positions and estimated arrivals.
• Public REST API: Stops, routes, vehicles, nearby searches, and trip planning are also available as JSON endpoints.
• No authentication, explicit limit: /mcp permits public calls and limits each IP to 60 requests per minute in memory.
• WTFPL code: The implementation is inspectable and modifiable; third-party data and marks retain separate rights.

Use Cases

A personal assistant can resolve nearby stops from coordinates and then request live arrivals. A route view can combine static stop order with current vehicles. Every response should retain the query time, stop or route identifier, source, and a prompt to verify operator notices before departure. plan_trip uses a static route graph and returns direct or one-transfer options; it does not account for realtime disruption, so route existence is not proof that a trip is currently operating.

Engineering tests should cover invalid stops, ambiguous route names, empty vehicle arrays, stale GTFS-RT, upstream timeouts, HTTP 429, and service restarts. Nearby tools process coordinates, while vehicle details may expose operational identifiers such as plates. If the server is connected through n8n-MCP or an agent, do not retain exact home locations, movement histories, or full IP logs without a justified policy.

Pricing

Version 1.3.4 and the public service have no documented project subscription, so the directory classifies the tool as free. Free access does not create unlimited capacity or an SLA. Self-hosting still costs compute, storage, GTFS imports, monitoring, logs, domains, and maintenance.

Pin 1.3.4 and run contract tests. A later public deployment or schema change should not enter production automatically.

Pros

• Clearly bounded read-only tools return structured transport data rather than model guesses.
• No-auth public access makes MCP and map-UI experiments easy to start.
• Static GTFS, live data, vehicle lookup, and trip planning are combined in one service.
• structuredContent and ui_blocks help clients preserve source data while rendering maps.
• Public WTFPL code can be inspected and modified.

Cons

• Coverage is limited to Lviv and cannot be generalized to other Ukrainian cities.
• The public service has no SLA, and 60 requests per minute is unsuitable for uncached scale.
• GTFS and GTFS-RT freshness depends on operators, vehicle hardware, collection, and caching.
• Static trip planning does not understand live disruption, congestion, fares, or complete accessibility needs.
• IP addresses, coordinates, stops, and vehicle queries create location-related logging risks.
• WTFPL resolves code reuse only; upstream data, maps, names, and marks need separate review.

Alternatives

FAQ

Is Lviv Timetable MCP an official operator service?

No. It is a public source project and service using Lviv transport data. Operator notices, stops, and on-site information remain authoritative for travel decisions.

Does the public MCP require an API key?

No. In 1.3.4 the production /mcp is public and read-only, with a limit of 60 requests per minute per IP. Excess calls receive HTTP 429.

Can it buy tickets or modify transport data?

No. Its exposed tools are queries only. It has no ticketing, account, dispatch, or data-write capability.

Are realtime arrivals guaranteed?

No. GTFS-RT sources, vehicle equipment, caches, collection, and service health affect results. Display timestamps and direct users to operator information.

Does WTFPL permit commercial use of every returned record?

WTFPL applies to repository code. It does not automatically license upstream GTFS/GTFS-RT, maps, stop names, routes, plates, or brands. Review data rights and attribution separately.

Does a public endpoint create privacy risk?

Yes. Servers and infrastructure may log IP addresses, coordinates, stops, and vehicle requests. Reduce coordinate precision and retention, and avoid sending continuous or home locations to unnecessary model and logging providers.

Bottom Line

Lviv Timetable MCP 1.3.4 is a well-bounded deterministic read-only service for one city’s transport data. Its no-auth public endpoint and structured output make prototyping easy, but the 60-request limit, single-city scope, upstream freshness, and lack of an SLA prevent it from becoming an automatic travel guarantee. Pin the version, preserve source timestamps, test failures and limits, minimize IP and location logs, and review WTFPL code rights separately from transport-data rights.