What can you do with this server?

Pumperly-MCP exposes a Pumperly fuel station instance as an MCP server, enabling LLMs to query real-time fuel prices, discover stations, plan routes, and geocode locations. * Find Nearest Stations (find_nearest_stations): Search for fuel stations closest to a given coordinate, filtered by fuel type (e.g., B7, E5, EV), with configurable radius and result limit. * Get Stations in Area (get_stations_in_area): Retrieve all fuel stations within a specified bounding box for a given fuel type. * Calculate Route (calculate_route): Compute a driving route between an origin and destination, with optional waypoints. * Find Route Stations (find_route_stations): Discover fuel stations within a corridor along a route (provided as a GeoJSON LineString), filtered by fuel type. * Geocode (geocode): Convert a place name, address, or POI query into geographic coordinates, with optional lat/lon biasing for more relevant results. * Read Resources (read-only): Access configuration (pumperly://config), statistics (pumperly://stats), and exchange rates (pumperly://exchange-rates). Transport options include HTTP (JSON-RPC over /mcp) or stdio (via npm).

de en es ja ko ru zh

pumperly-mcp

by GeiserX

Overview Schema Related Servers Score Discussions

Remote

What you get

Type	What for	MCP URI / Tool id
Resources	Browse configuration, statistics, and exchange rates read-only	`pumperly://configpumperly://statspumperly://exchange-rates`
Tools	Find stations, calculate routes, and geocode locations	`find_nearest_stationsget_stations_in_areacalculate_routefind_route_stationsgeocode`

Everything is exposed over a single JSON-RPC endpoint (/mcp). LLMs / Agents can: initialize -> readResource -> listTools -> callTool ... and so on.

Related MCP server: Foundry MCP Server

Quick-start (Docker Compose)

services:
  pumperly-mcp:
    image: drumsergio/pumperly-mcp:latest
    ports:
      - "127.0.0.1:8080:8080"
    environment:
      - PUMPERLY_URL=https://pumperly.com

Security note: The HTTP transport listens on 127.0.0.1:8080 by default. If you need to expose it on a network, place it behind a reverse proxy with authentication.

Install via npm (stdio transport)

npx pumperly-mcp

Or install globally:

npm install -g pumperly-mcp
pumperly-mcp

This downloads the pre-built Go binary from GitHub Releases for your platform and runs it with stdio transport. Requires at least one published release.

Local build

git clone https://github.com/GeiserX/pumperly-mcp
cd pumperly-mcp

# (optional) create .env from the sample
cp .env.example .env && $EDITOR .env

go run ./cmd/server

Configuration

Variable	Default	Description
`PUMPERLY_URL`	`https://pumperly.com`	Pumperly instance URL (without trailing /)
`LISTEN_ADDR`	`127.0.0.1:8080`	HTTP listen address (Docker sets `0.0.0.0:8080`)
`TRANSPORT`	(empty = HTTP)	Set to `stdio` for stdio transport

Put them in a .env file (from .env.example) or set them in the environment.

Testing

Tested with Inspector and it is currently fully working. Before making a PR, make sure this MCP server behaves well via this medium.

Example configuration for client LLMs

{
  "schema_version": "v1",
  "name_for_human": "Pumperly-MCP",
  "name_for_model": "pumperly_mcp",
  "description_for_human": "Query real-time fuel prices, find stations, plan routes, and geocode locations via Pumperly.",
  "description_for_model": "Interact with a Pumperly instance that aggregates fuel station data. First call initialize, then reuse the returned session id in header \"Mcp-Session-Id\" for every other call. Use readResource to fetch URIs that begin with pumperly://. Use listTools to discover available actions and callTool to execute them.",
  "auth": { "type": "none" },
  "api": {
    "type": "jsonrpc-mcp",
    "url":  "http://localhost:8080/mcp",
    "init_method": "initialize",
    "session_header": "Mcp-Session-Id"
  },
  "logo_url": "https://pumperly.com/logo.png",
  "contact_email": "acsdesk@protonmail.com",
  "legal_info_url": "https://github.com/GeiserX/pumperly-mcp/blob/main/LICENSE"
}

Credits

Pumperly -- real-time fuel price aggregation

MCP-GO -- modern MCP implementation

GoReleaser -- painless multi-arch releases

Maintainers

@GeiserX.

Contributing

Feel free to dive in! Open an issue or submit PRs.

Pumperly-MCP follows the Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct.

Other MCP Servers by GeiserX

cashpilot-mcp — Passive income monitoring
duplicacy-mcp — Backup health monitoring
genieacs-mcp — TR-069 device management
lynxprompt-mcp — AI configuration blueprints
telegram-archive-mcp — Telegram message archive

Project	Description
Pumperly	Open-source fuel and EV route planner with real-time prices
Pumperly-android	Official Android app for Pumperly fuel and EV route planner
pumperly-ha	Home Assistant custom integration for Pumperly fuel and EV charging prices
n8n-nodes-pumperly	n8n community node for Pumperly fuel and EV charging data

Available Tools

5 tools

calculate_routeC

Destructive

Calculate a driving route between two points

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`dest_lat`	Yes	Destination latitude
`dest_lon`	Yes	Destination longitude
`origin_lat`	Yes	Origin latitude
`origin_lon`	Yes	Origin longitude
`waypoints`	No	Optional JSON array of waypoints as [[lon,lat],...]

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The description does not address the destructiveHint annotation, which suggests side effects. 'Calculate' implies a read-only computation, but the tool may modify state. No explanation of what gets destroyed or other behavioral traits is given.

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?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, though it could be expanded to include output hints without losing conciseness.

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?

The description lacks information about the return value (e.g., does it return geometry, duration, distance?) and does not clarify the destructive hint. Given no output schema, these omissions reduce completeness.

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?

All parameters are described in the input schema with clear names and types. The description adds no extra meaning beyond 'driving route', so it meets the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 clearly states 'Calculate a driving route between two points', specifying the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like geocode or find_nearest_stations, which are about location data and stations rather than route calculation.

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. For instance, it could mention that for station-specific queries, sibling tools like find_route_stations are appropriate, but it does not.

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

find_nearest_stationsC

Destructive

Find fuel stations nearest to a coordinate

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`fuel`	Yes	Fuel type code (e.g. B7, E5, E10, E85, LPG, CNG, LNG, EV)
`lat`	Yes	Latitude of the search centre
`limit`	No	Maximum number of results (default 5)
`lon`	Yes	Longitude of the search centre
`radius_km`	No	Search radius in kilometres (default 10)

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

Annotation contradiction: description says 'find' (non-destructive) but annotations have destructiveHint=true, implying potential data modification. No additional behavioral context provided.

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?

Single sentence with no wasted words, front-loads the essential action.

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?

No output schema, so description should hint at return type or behavior. Fails to mention destructive nature suggested by annotations, leaving agent uncertain about side effects.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters. Description adds no extra meaning beyond schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the purpose (find fuel stations nearest to coordinate), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tool 'get_stations_in_area' which likely also returns stations by area.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_stations_in_area or find_route_stations. Context signals show sibling tools but description offers no usage advice.

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

find_route_stationsC

Destructive

Find fuel stations along a route corridor

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`corridor_km`	No	Corridor width in kilometres (default 5)
`fuel`	Yes	Fuel type code (e.g. B7, E5, E10, E85, LPG, CNG, LNG, EV)
`geometry`	Yes	GeoJSON LineString as a JSON string, e.g. {"type":"LineString","coordinates":[[lon,lat],...]}

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

The description claims a read operation ('Find') while annotations set destructiveHint=true, suggesting data modification. This contradiction is not addressed. No additional behavioral context beyond the purpose is provided.

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?

Single sentence with no wasted words. However, it is too brief given the contradiction and lack of usage guidance, slightly reducing effectiveness.

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?

Despite low complexity, the description is incomplete: it does not explain the output, does not resolve the annotation contradiction, and assumes the agent knows what 'route corridor' means. A more complete description would include output format and usage notes.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for each parameter (corridor_km, fuel, geometry). The tool description does not add new semantic details beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Find fuel stations along a route corridor' clearly states the verb and resource, and implies the corridor context. It distinguishes from siblings like 'find_nearest_stations' (point-based) and 'get_stations_in_area' (area-based), though not explicitly.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like find_nearest_stations or get_stations_in_area. Usage is implied by the description and the required geometry parameter (GeoJSON LineString), but no exclusion or prerequisite details.

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

geocodeB

Destructive

Search for a location by name (geocoding)

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lat`	No	Optional latitude for geographic biasing
`lon`	No	Optional longitude for geographic biasing
`query`	Yes	Search query (e.g. city name, address, POI)

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

Description says 'search' (read-like), but annotations set destructiveHint=true, suggesting modification. This contradiction confuses agent behavior. Description adds no further behavioral context.

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?

Single sentence is concise and front-loaded, but lacks structure (e.g., no sections) and provides minimal detail for a 3-param tool.

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?

With contradictory annotations and no output schema, description misses essential return format info and fails to disclose behavioral implications, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 has 100% description coverage, but description adds geocoding context ('by name') beyond param details. This clarifies the tool's purpose and differentiates forward vs reverse geocoding.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'search' and resource 'location by name' (geocoding), distinguishing it from sibling tools like calculate_route and find_nearest_stations.

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?

Description implies geocoding use via 'search by name' but provides no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, no exclusions, and no context-sensitive guidance.

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

get_stations_in_areaB

Destructive

Get fuel stations within a bounding box

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`bbox`	Yes	Bounding box as "minLon,minLat,maxLon,maxLat"
`fuel`	Yes	Fuel type code (e.g. B7, E5, E10, E85, LPG, CNG, LNG, EV)

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

The description says 'Get' implying a read-only operation, but annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, suggesting potential side effects or data destruction. This is a direct contradiction, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic action.

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, e.g., by noting the return type or limitations.

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 the potential for destructive behavior (per annotations), the lack of explanation about side effects, return format, or operational limits makes the description incomplete. The minimal information does not compensate for the complexity implied by annotations.

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 100% for both parameters (bbox format and fuel type codes). The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get fuel stations within a bounding box' clearly states the verb (Get), resource (fuel stations), and scope (bounding box). It effectively differentiates from sibling tools like find_nearest_stations (point-based) and find_route_stations (route-based).

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 when a bounding box is available, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like find_nearest_stations or calculate_route. No guidance on prerequisites or limitations is provided.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

5 tool updatesv0.1.0Apr 3, 2026
- First observedcalculate_route
- First observedfind_nearest_stations
- First observedfind_route_stations
- First observedgeocode
- First observedget_stations_in_area

Install Server

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: route calculation, finding stations by proximity, along a route, geocoding, and area-based search. No overlap in functionality.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., calculate_route, find_nearest_stations). Even 'geocode' is a conventional single word verb. No mixing of styles.

Tool Count5/5

With 5 tools, the set is well-scoped for a fuel station and routing service. Each tool provides essential functionality without redundancy or unnecessary complexity.

Completeness4/5

Core operations are covered: geocoding, route calculation, and three ways to find stations. Minor gaps like station details (prices, amenities) or reverse geocoding are not critical for the primary use case.

Maintenance

ActivityActive

ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Need Help?

Related Servers

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

TokenOracle
com.guffeyholdings
Hosted MCP server for LLM cost estimation, model comparison, and budget-aware routing.
Finance Monitoring
2
jumpcloud-genaiOAuth
com.jumpcloud
An MCP server that provides an API to LLMs to manage their JumpCloud resources.
Cloud Platforms Security Developer Tools
2
mcp AOAuth
io.scorecard
MCP server providing access to the Scorecard API to evaluate and optimize LLM systems.
RAG Systems Monitoring Testing & QA Tools
3
mcp A
ai.llmse
Public MCP server for the LLM Search Engine
Search RAG Systems Developer Tools
102

Related MCP Servers

mcp-llm
Code Execution Autonomous Agents
sammcj
A
license
B
quality
C
maintenance
An MCP server that provides LLMs access to other LLMs
Updated a year ago (2025-03-15 05:37 UTC)
4
48
78
MIT
Foundry MCP Server
Blockchain Code Execution
PraneshASP
A
license
Not graded
quality
F
maintenance
A lightweight, fast MCP server that provides onchain capabilities for the LLMs and Agents.
Updated 8 months ago (2026-01-17 15:25 UTC)
34
253
MIT
auto-mcp-server
Developer Tools
alanbuxton
A
license
Not graded
quality
C
maintenance
Enables LLMs to interact with any REST API that has an OpenAPI specification by providing a lightweight MCP server that translates between natural language and API calls.
Updated 2 months ago (2026-07-02 22:01 UTC)
MIT
OpenAI-Compatible MCP Gateway
AI & Machine Learning Developer Tools
Deathwalker-47
F
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
Local MCP server that exposes fixed tools for GPT, Claude, and Gemini while routing to any OpenAI-compatible chat completions backend with independent configuration per target.
Updated 5 months ago (2026-04-04 06:08 UTC)
1
-

Latest Blog Posts

Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 25, 2026.
mcp
Agent Identity
OAuth 2.1
Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an Intern
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 2, 2026.
Agent Identity
MCP Security
OAuth Delegation
Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)
By Om-Shree-0709 on June 30, 2026.
Agentic Ai
Prompt Injection
WebAssembly

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/GeiserX/pumperly-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server

What you get

Quick-start (Docker Compose)

Install via npm (stdio transport)

Local build

Configuration

Testing

Example configuration for client LLMs

Credits

Maintainers

Contributing

Other MCP Servers by GeiserX

Related Projects

Available Tools

Tool Schema Changelog

Maintenance

Resources

Looking for Admin?

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API