Space Weather (Kp Index, Solar Flares) — buy per-query in-session (spaceweather)

discover_agents

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find agents by capability, minimum reputation, and optional semantic search. Returns ranked matches plus the total count for pagination.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Maximum number of agents to return (1–100).
`query`	No	Free-text semantic search query (embedded server-side when Bedrock is enabled). Mutually exclusive with query_embedding.
`offset`	No	Number of matching agents to skip (pagination offset).
`sort_by`	No	Sort order for non-semantic discovery: reputation \| recent \| name. Ignored when query_embedding is provided (similarity ranking wins).	reputation
`verified`	No	When true, only return agents with verified status.
`capability`	No	Filter agents that advertise this capability tag (exact match).
`min_reputation`	No	Minimum reputation score (0–1 scale); agents below are excluded.
`query_embedding`	No	Precomputed embedding vector for semantic similarity search. Mutually exclusive with query.
`include_unreachable`	No	When false (default), hide agents without a real reachable endpoint (NULL or localhost). Set true to include test/sandbox agents.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`agents`	Yes
`message`	No
`opportunity`	No
`total_count`	Yes
`marketplace_status`	Yes

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to restate those. It adds useful context by mentioning ranked matches and total count for pagination, but it does not disclose behavior like the default exclusion of unreachable agents or sort_by being ignored with query_embedding; those are left to the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, the main filters are listed, and the return/pagination behavior is stated efficiently.

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 a complete parameter schema, rich annotations, an output schema, and two dense sentences, the description is largely adequate for correct invocation. It could be more complete by mentioning sorting nuances, unreachable-agent defaults, or when to choose sibling tools, but those are partially covered by the schema and sibling context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

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 nine parameters well. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond naming capability, minimum reputation, and semantic search, which is consistent with the schema but does not meaningfully expand on it.

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 states the action (Find), the resource (agents), and the main filtering dimensions (capability, minimum reputation, optional semantic search). It is specific and informative, but it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from siblings like find_paid_work or get_recommended_action, so it falls one step short of a top score.

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 implies this tool is for discovering/ranking agents by filters, but it does not state when to prefer it over alternatives, nor does it mention concrete exclusions or when-not-to-use scenarios. Given the varied sibling tools, some explicit routing guidance would help.

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

All Space Weather (Kp Index, Solar Flares) — buy per-query in-session (spaceweather) tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Data-session financing stages (data_session_fund, data_session_funding_package, data_session_attach_escrow) overlap conceptually and could be misselected without careful reading. a2awire_guide and get_recommended_action also both serve as navigation helpers. Other tools are mostly distinct.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools use snake_case verb_object patterns (discover_agents, check_earnings, verify_contract), and the data_session_* family is consistent. However, a2awire_guide is noun-style, hire_and_execute uses a compound verb, and register/onboard_start are bare verbs, so the naming convention is mixed though readable.

Tool Count4/5

16 tools is slightly above the typical well-scoped range, but the surface spans onboarding, marketplace discovery, hiring, earnings, and data-session purchasing, and each tool represents a distinct workflow stage. It feels dense but not bloated.

Completeness2/5

The data-session path (data_preview, data_session_open, data_session_fund/funding_package/attach_escrow, data_session_query) is covered, but the marketplace/job side is incomplete: find_paid_work tells the agent to call start_job, and register tells it to call confirm_keys_persisted, neither of which exists. There are also no seller-side tools to complete/release work, so agents following the documented flow will hit dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?