Jet Tracker

Add a watch-by-profile rule

jt_watch_rule_add

Idempotent

Create a watch rule by profile: every field is optional and null means "no filter on this"; at least one of modelFamily/uf/category/rbac should be set or the rule watches the whole live fleet. eventTypes picks which business events this rule delivers (registry.changed, airworthiness.cva_expiring, airworthiness.cva_expired, flight.ground_stay, program.ea_revised). dryRun=true only returns preview.count (how many live registrations match right now) without saving. Requires a Jet Tracker account connection (OAuth or an account key), not a system key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`uf`	No	Registered state (UF) of the owner in the RAB, e.g. SP. Not where the aircraft is based.
`rbac`	No	91, 91k, 135, 121 or 137.
`label`	No	Free label for the account to recognize the rule.
`dryRun`	No	true: only preview, does not save.
`category`	No	Fine category (light, midsize...) or group (jet, turboprop, helicopter, piston).
`eventTypes`	Yes	Which business events this rule delivers.
`modelFamily`	No	Catalog family slug (e.g. phenom-300).

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 changedOct 7, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / uf / description

Previous value: -"Base state (RAB base_uf), e.g. SP."New value: +"Registered state (UF) of the owner in the RAB, e.g. SP. Not where the aircraft is based."

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"
+]

AddedSep 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds genuinely new behavior: what happens when all filters are null (whole live fleet), what dryRun does ('only returns preview.count ... without saving'), the exact deliverable events, and a real auth constraint (account connection, not a system key). This is substantive disclosure beyond the structured fields.

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 that is front-loaded with the purpose, then filter semantics, dryRun behavior, and the auth prerequisite, with no filler sentences. It is slightly packed with semicolon-separated clauses, which costs it the top mark but nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed, yet the description still explains the one meaningful response mode (dryRun returning preview.count). Combined with the null-filter behavior, event list, and auth requirement, an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 cross-parameter semantics the schema cannot express: every field is optional, null means no filter, and at least one of the four filter fields should be set. It also enumerates the valid eventTypes inline. The per-parameter descriptions already carry the field-level meaning, so it is not a full 5.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a watch rule by profile') and its scope (profile-based rather than aircraft-based), which implicitly separates it from jt_watch_add. However, no sibling is named, so an agent must infer the distinction from the 'by profile' phrasing rather than being told.

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?

Gives clear operating context: at least one of modelFamily/uf/category/rbac should be set or the rule watches the whole live fleet, and it explicitly notes the account-connection prerequisite ('OAuth or an account key, not a system key'). It does not explicitly route between this and jt_watch_add / jt_watch_set, so it stops short of the top score.

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?