Vigi-Sky

Observation Conditions

observation_conditions

Read-onlyIdempotent

Night/moon/solar observing-conditions score. NOT a UFO-appearance probability.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lat`	Yes	Latitude WGS84
`lng`	No	Longitude WGS84. lon and lng are aliases — provide either.
`lon`	No	Longitude WGS84. lon and lng are aliases — provide either.
`lang`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`citations`	Yes
`provenance`	Yes
`interpretation`	No
`not_ufo_probability`	No
`observation_conditions_score`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed6 schema fields changedAug 18, 2026
- removedOutput schema / properties / doctrine
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / interpretation
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / not_ufo_probability
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / observation_conditions_score
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": [
+    "number",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / provenance / properties / never
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "citations",
+  "provenance"
+]
```
First observedAug 17, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds the context that the tool computes a score for night/moon/solar conditions, which is valuable but does not disclose return format, range, or any other behavioral traits. It does not contradict the annotations.

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?

The description is two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the second sentence provides a crucial negative clarification. Every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Despite having annotations, a high schema coverage, and an output schema, the description is very brief. It does not explain the score's range, interpretation, or any caveats about location or time. For a score-computing tool with many sibling tools, this leaves ambiguity.

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 75% with lat, lng, lon, and lang all described. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning; it only provides overall context. Given the high schema coverage, a 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?

The description clearly states the tool evaluates observing conditions (night, moon, solar) and explicitly distinguishes it from a UFO-appearance probability. This verb+resource framing is specific and differentiates from sibling tools like 'aurora', 'solar', and 'nights_network'.

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 gives a negative usage hint (NOT a UFO-appearance probability) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'aurora' or 'tonight_sky'. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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

All Vigi-Sky 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.

Resources

Need Help?