Skip to main content
Glama

Jet Tracker

by br.com.jettracker
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Trip cost between two airports

jt_trip_cost
Read-onlyIdempotent

Cost of a trip origin to destination (ICAO codes or city names) for a model with a full cost profile, across charter, fractional and owned (variable cost only) models, with distance and block time. Same aliases as jt_compute_tco. Origin equal to destination returns error degenerate_route.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesModelo com calculadora completa (mesmos aliases do compute_tco).
destIcaoYesDestino: ICAO ou cidade/nome.
roundTripNotrue = ida e volta (default); false = só ida.
originIcaoYesOrigem: ICAO (SBSP) ou cidade/nome (Congonhas, São Paulo).

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. Changed12 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Previous value: -"Slug de modelo com calculadora completa: embraer-phenom-100, embraer-phenom-300, beechcraft-hawker-400xp, leonardo-aw109 ou airbus-h125."New value: +"Modelo com calculadora completa (mesmos aliases do compute_tco)."
    • removedInput schema / properties / slug / enum
      Removed value: -[
-  "embraer-phenom-100",
-  "embraer-phenom-300",
-  "beechcraft-hawker-400xp",
-  "leonardo-aw109",
-  "airbus-h125"
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / slug / maxLength
      Added value: +80
    • addedInput schema / properties / slug / minLength
      Added value: +2
    • 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"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value beyond these by disclosing the degenerate_route error when origin equals destination and clarifying the cost scope across charter, fractional, and owned (variable cost only) models. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core operation and scope, the second handles alias compatibility, and the third gives a key error condition. There is little waste, though the first sentence is somewhat dense and grammatically loose.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With strong annotations and an output schema present, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers input formats, alias behavior, ownership-model scope, and a degenerate-route edge case. The main completeness gap is the lack of explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over jt_compute_tco.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful context by explaining the required cost profile and ownership modes for the slug parameter, and by confirming that both ICAO codes and city names are valid for origin/destination. This modestly enriches the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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 names the resource: trip cost between origin and destination, with input formats (ICAO/city names), cost profile scope, and included metrics (distance, block time). It also mentions the degenerate_route error condition. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from jt_compute_tco beyond noting shared aliases, so it stops short of full sibling distinction.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use jt_trip_cost instead of alternatives such as jt_compute_tco, nor any when-not-to-use conditions. The phrase 'Same aliases as jt_compute_tco' addresses alias compatibility, not tool selection, leaving the agent without a decision rule.

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

All Jet Tracker toolsInspect
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