Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Perigee

by io.github.dlamarre-dev
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Object facts

perigee_object
Read-only

Facts about an object: name, agency, country, launch date, status, mission goals and notes, identifiers (NORAD, COSPAR, Horizons), official website, sources and verification date, a catalogue image with credit and licence, and links to its view in Perigee. include_image also returns the image itself.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "perigee_object"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesObject id from perigee_find (NORAD number, mission id, planet, "moon:<id>", "site:<id>", "launch:<id>", "star:<id>", "comet:<id>", "asteroid:<id>" or a dwarf planet name), e.g. "25544" for the ISS.
langNoLanguage of names and texts (default en).
include_imageNoAlso return the catalogue image itself, not only its link and credit (default false).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds useful return-behavior detail: sources and verification date, image credit/licence, and the effect of include_image. It does not cover error behavior or missing data, but it meaningfully supplements 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and the return contents, and the include_image note is placed usefully at the end. The long field enumeration is justified by the absence of an output schema, though it could be slightly more scannable.

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?

Because there is no output schema, the description appropriately lists the returned facts in detail, including image metadata and verification information. With annotations covering safety and the schema covering parameters, the definition is largely complete for a read-only catalogue lookup.

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 coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well documented in the schema. The description restates the include_image behavior but adds little beyond the schema for id or lang; baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter semantics.

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 identifies the resource as an object and enumerates the catalogue metadata it returns, which helps distinguish it from siblings like perigee_state or perigee_orbit. It does not explicitly name those siblings, so the differentiation is implied by content rather than stated.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description says what the tool returns but gives no explicit guidance on when to use it versus perigee_find, perigee_state, or other sibling tools. The only usage hint is indirect, through the schema's note that the id comes from perigee_find.

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

All Perigee toolsInspect
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