FiatDock

Latest satellite images of any point (Sentinel-2) ($0.009)

satellite_scenes

Read-onlyIdempotent

PAID ($0.009 USDC via x402). The newest satellite images of any coordinate, from the Copernicus Sentinel-2 Level-2A archive (free, open imagery; ~10 m per pixel; a revisit every ~5 days) via Element 84's Earth Search catalogue: for each scene the capture time, cloud cover, MGRS tile, sun elevation, a small JPEG preview link and the full-resolution true-colour image as a Cloud-Optimized GeoTIFF. Filter by a cloud limit (default 30%) and a look-back window (default 60 days, up to 365); newest first. No scene in the window answers 404 and is not charged. Every answer carries the attribution the Copernicus licence asks for. Without payment this returns the 402 challenge; the fiatdock-mcp npm package pays automatically. Any answer the tool cannot produce is >= 400 and is NOT charged.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lat`	No	Latitude in decimal degrees (-90 to 90)
`lon`	No	Longitude in decimal degrees (-180 to 180)
`days`	No	How far back to look, in days, 1-365 (default 60)
`limit`	No	How many scenes, 1-10, newest first (default 3)
`payment`	No	Base64 of a single x402 v2 PaymentPayload (EIP-3009 transferWithAuthorization on Base USDC). OMIT it on the first call: the 402 you get back carries `howToPay.payloadTemplate` — the exact envelope to fill in — plus the price and the EIP-712 domain. Send it on the second call to complete the purchase; it is forwarded as the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header, never as body data. Nothing is charged for the 402 itself, and a call that fails after payment settles nothing.
`maxCloudPct`	No	Only scenes with at most this much cloud, 0-100 (default 30)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`asOf`	Yes	ISO time the catalogue was read
`note`	Yes	How to use the image links, and their limits
`count`	Yes	Scenes returned
`point`	Yes	The point the scenes cover
`scenes`	Yes	The scenes, newest first
`source`	Yes	Where the data came from
`filters`	Yes	The cloud limit and look-back window applied
`matched`	Yes	Scenes the catalogue matched before the limit
`defaulted`	No	Present only when the body was empty: which subject the answer is for, and why
`collection`	Yes	The imagery collection (Sentinel-2 Level-2A)
`attribution`	Yes	The attribution the Copernicus licence asks for — keep it beside any use of the images

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover only readOnly/idempotent/openWorld, so the description carries the rest and does so richly: pricing ($0.009 USDC via x402), the 402 challenge flow, that a 404/no-scene response is not charged, that failures after settlement settle nothing, and that attribution is always included. This is behavioral context well 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?

The price and payment status are front-loaded and every sentence is informative, but the single dense paragraph packs payment, licensing, filtering, and error semantics together, which slightly taxes scanning. Efficient overall with minor structural compression.

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?

For a paid, open-world, zero-required-param tool with an output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: cost, the two-step payment protocol, charging semantics, filter defaults, and error behavior. Nothing essential is omitted.

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% and the schema already documents ranges, defaults, and even the payment envelope mechanics in detail. The description restates the cloud-limit and look-back defaults but adds no syntax or format meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb+resource combination ('newest satellite images of any coordinate') with concrete provenance (Copernicus Sentinel-2 Level-2A via Earth Search). The scope, resolution, and revisit cadence make it instantly distinguishable from every sibling tool in the list.

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 context for when the tool applies (fetching imagery at a coordinate, with cloud/look-back filters) and explains the payment branch (first call returns 402, second completes). It does not, however, route the agent to any alternative such as call_x402 or search_x402 for related tasks, so it stops short of explicit when-not guidance.

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

All FiatDock 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.