Skip to main content
Glama

Datalastic Vessel Tracking & Maritime Intelligence

Check an async report

report_status

Check an async report job by report_id (from report_request or report_list). Returns its status: PENDING or IN_PROGRESS (still generating — wait a bit and check again) or DONE. When DONE, result_url is a download link for the result ZIP; hand it to the user. Links are time-limited — if one has expired, run report_status again for a fresh link. The server never downloads the file itself.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
report_idYesThe report_id returned by report_request (or seen in report_list).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYes
report_idYes
created_atYes
result_urlYes
updated_atYes
report_typeYes

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses behavior: returns status values, result_url on DONE, time-limited links, server never downloads file. No contradiction.

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?

Five sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no unnecessary words. Each sentence adds essential 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 output schema exists and simple polling pattern, description covers all needed behavioral context: status meanings, URL handling, expiration. No 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 already covers parameter with full description. Description adds value by context hint 'from report_request or report_list', but schema already says it's the report_id.

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?

Clearly states it checks an async report job by report_id, with specific resource and action. Distinguishes from siblings report_request (submit) and report_list (list reports) by context.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly tells when to use: after report_request or report_list. Provides guidance for each status: wait for PENDING/IN_PROGRESS, hand URL to user when DONE, re-run if link expired.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: vessel tracking (get_vessel, get_vessel_pro, get_vessel_history, get_vessel_info, estimated_vessel_position), registry search (find_vessels, find_ports), port details (get_port), weather (get_weather), sea route (sea_route), async reports (report_*), and intelligence modules (intel_*). Even similar tools like find_vessels vs get_vessel are well-differentiated by their descriptions.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent lowercase underscore pattern with a verb_noun structure (e.g., get_vessel, find_ports, sea_route). The intel_* tools use a uniform prefix for intelligence operations, maintaining predictability across the set.

Tool Count3/5

With 25 tools, this server is at the upper boundary of the borderline range. While the tools are well-organized and necessary for the comprehensive maritime intelligence domain, the count feels slightly heavy compared to an ideal 3-15 tool scope.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface is remarkably complete: it covers vessel tracking (live, historic, estimated), registry search, port details, weather, sea route calculation, async report management, and a full suite of intelligence reports (casualties, inspections, ownership, etc.). There are no obvious gaps for maritime vessel tracking and intelligence tasks.