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.

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

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so no contradiction. The description adds substantial behavioral detail: pagination limits (max 60 per call, scans 200 reservations per page, nextCursor), airframe-level grouping (one signal per physical airframe with registrations[] and airframeCount vs registrationCount), and the caveat that it is a signal, not a completed transfer. This goes well beyond the annotations.

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 dense but well-structured, front-loading the core definition before explaining grouping, pagination, and usage. It covers multiple nuances in a single paragraph without unnecessary fluff. It could be slightly more concise, but each sentence contributes meaningful information.

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?

Given the output schema is present, the description need not cover return types. It covers matching criteria, grouping semantics, pagination limits, usage context, and the caveat. This is complete for an agent to call the tool correctly and interpret results. There are no apparent gaps.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds value by explaining the meaning of limit (max 60 per call, pagination) and cursor (nextCursor for pagination), and clarifies that includeUnmatched defaults to false and relates to the foreign-twin matching. This enriches the schema definitions without redundancy.

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 clearly states what the tool does: it returns Brazilian mark reservations that match a foreign registry, representing an import signal. It details the matching criteria (serial number + compatible model) and the output grouping (one signal per airframe). While it doesn't name sibling tools, the purpose is specific and unambiguous, distinguishing itself from generic registry search tools.

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 provides context about the tool's usefulness ('useful for brokers, lenders and insurers') and clarifies that it is a signal, not a completed transfer. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as jt_registry_changes or jt_cross_registry, nor when not to use it. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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?