Jet Tracker

Aircraft being imported into Brazil

jt_import_signals

Read-onlyIdempotent

Brazilian mark reservations (reserva de marca) that appeared in the RAB in a period AND whose airframe exists in a foreign registry (FAA N-number or CA/AU/NZ/MX), matched by serial number + compatible model. One signal per physical AIRFRAME: when the same serial got several reservations (a broker reserving PS-XXX, PS-YYY and PR-ZZZ for one Learjet), registrations[] lists them all and airframeCount is distinct from registrationCount. This is the import signal: an aircraft entering Brazil, useful for brokers, lenders and insurers. Max 60 per call; scans up to 200 reservations per page, paginate with nextCursor. It is a signal, not a completed transfer (see the caveat).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	No	End date, YYYY-MM-DD. Default: today.
`from`	Yes	Start date, YYYY-MM-DD.
`limit`	No	Default 20.
`cursor`	No	nextCursor from a previous page.
`includeUnmatched`	No	Also return reservations with no foreign twin found (default false).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`code`	No	Machine-readable error code (INTERNAL, TIMEOUT, INVALID_ARGUMENT, NOT_FOUND, TOOL_FAILED, ACCOUNT_KEY_REQUIRED).
`_meta`	No
`error`	No
`found`	No
`gated`	No
`requestId`	No
`retryable`	No
`quota_exceeded`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 28, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / _meta / required

Previous value: -[
-  "tool",
-  "tier",
-  "source",
-  "asOf",
-  "gated",
-  "via"
-]New value: +[
+  "tool",
+  "source",
+  "asOf",
+  "gated",
+  "via"
+]

Changed9 schema fields changedSep 16, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / cursor

Added value: +{
+  "description": "nextCursor from a previous page.",
+  "maxLength": 64,
+  "type": "string"
+}

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"
+}
```

First observedSep 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld=false, and the description still adds real operational context: the one-signal-per-airframe de-duplication rule, that registrations[] aggregates multiple reservations and airframeCount differs from registrationCount, the 60-row cap, and the 200-reservation scan per page with nextCursor pagination. That is exactly the behavioral detail annotations cannot convey.

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?

A single dense paragraph, front-loaded with the matching definition before the operational limits and the broker example. Every clause carries information, though the parenthetical PS-XXX/PS-YYY/PR-ZZZ example and the dangling 'see the caveat' reference cost it a point.

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 5-parameter, output-schema-backed signal tool this covers what matters: what qualifies as a hit, how hits are de-duplicated, result caps and pagination, and the semantic boundary between a reservation signal and a completed transfer. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly 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%, so the binding baseline is 3; the description rises above it by explaining pagination mechanics ('Max 60 per call; scans up to 200 reservations per page, paginate with nextCursor') and the aggregation semantics that explain why one result row can cover several registrations. It does not address includeUnmatched, but the schema already documents that flag.

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 states a precise resource and the exact join rule: Brazilian mark reservations in the RAB whose airframe matches a foreign registry entry (FAA N-number or CA/AU/NZ/MX) by serial + compatible model, and labels the output 'the import signal'. It does not, however, name or distinguish itself from near-neighbours such as jt_cross_registry or jt_registry_changes in a 40-tool sibling set, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied. The target audience is named ('useful for brokers, lenders and insurers') and a caveat is gestured at ('It is a signal, not a completed transfer'), but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-to-use-an-alternative guidance and the referenced caveat is never actually stated. An agent can infer the use case but gets no routing rules.

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

All Jet Tracker tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?