Skip to main content
Glama

Same airframe in other registries

jt_cross_registry
Read-onlyIdempotent

Given a registration (Brazilian PR-/PT-, US N-number, or CA/AU/NZ/MX) or a serial number, find the same airframe in the other registries Jet Tracker indexes (Brazil, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico), matched by serial + compatible manufacturer/model. Traces an aircraft moving between countries. Serial numbers repeat across models (see the caveat).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesRegistration mark or serial number (MSN).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoMachine-readable error code (INTERNAL, TIMEOUT, INVALID_ARGUMENT, NOT_FOUND, TOOL_FAILED, ACCOUNT_KEY_REQUIRED).
_metaNo
errorNo
foundNo
gatedNo
requestIdNo
retryableNo
quota_exceededNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / _meta / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "tool",
      -  "tier",
      -  "source",
      -  "asOf",
      -  "gated",
      -  "via"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "tool",
      +  "source",
      +  "asOf",
      +  "gated",
      +  "via"
      +]
  2. Changed8 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / asOf / description
      Added value: +"Alias of sourceUpdatedAt (kept for compatibility)."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / generatedAt
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "When this response was produced (ISO 8601).",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / observedAt
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "description": "Last event actually observed in the data returned (last flight, last arrival, last listing sighting)."
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / sourceUpdatedAt
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "description": "Last sync of the underlying source (RAB snapshot, registry import, listing scan). Never in the future."
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / _meta / properties / validUntil
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "description": "Expiry of the fact returned, when it has one (CVA validity, period end)."
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / code
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Machine-readable error code (INTERNAL, TIMEOUT, INVALID_ARGUMENT, NOT_FOUND, TOOL_FAILED, ACCOUNT_KEY_REQUIRED).",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / requestId
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / retryable
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), but the description adds real behavioral value beyond them: the match algorithm (serial + compatible manufacturer/model) and the caveat that serial numbers repeat across models, which warns the agent about false positives.

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?

Two dense sentences, front-loaded with purpose and inputs. The trailing '(see the caveat)' is slightly awkward since no separate caveat section exists, but the substance is tight and earns its place.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a single-parameter, read-only lookup with a 100%-covered schema and an output schema, the description supplies everything the agent needs: accepted inputs, matching logic, target registries, and a false-positive caveat. Nothing material is missing.

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 100% and there is only one parameter, so the baseline would be 3. The description goes beyond the schema by enumerating accepted input formats (Brazilian PR-/PT-, US N-number, CA/AU/NZ/MX registrations, or a serial), which usefully clarifies what a valid 'query' looks like.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (find the same airframe across registries) and scopes it to the exact registry set Jet Tracker indexes. The 'traces an aircraft moving between countries' phrase plus the matching rule (serial + compatible manufacturer/model) distinguishes it clearly from siblings like jt_aircraft_lookup and jt_registry_changes.

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?

Clearly conveys when this tool is the right one: when you have a registration or serial and want the counterpart airframe in another registry. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as jt_aircraft_lookup for single-registry lookups, but the context is unambiguous.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources