airlinesSearch the Aviationstack airline directory by name, IATA 2-letter code, or ICAO 3-letter code; returns airline name, codes, country, hub airport, and status.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| search | No | ||
| iata_code | No | 2-letter IATA | |
| icao_code | No | 3-letter ICAO |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | No | Array of airline objects | |
| pagination | No | Pagination metadata |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / airline_idAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / airline_urlRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Airline website URL",
- "type": [
- "string",
- "null"
- ]
-}Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / callsignAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / date_foundedAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / fleet_average_age / typePrevious value: -[
- "number",
- "null"
-]New value: +"string"Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / fleet_sizeAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / hub_codeAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / iata_prefix_accountingAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / idAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / data / items / properties / statusAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / pagination / properties / totalAdded value: +{
+ "type": "number"
+}Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "iata_code": "AA"
+ },
+ {
+ "search": "United"
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "data": {
+ "description": "Array of airline objects",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "airline_name": {
+ "description": "Airline name",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "airline_url": {
+ "description": "Airline website URL",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "country_iso2": {
+ "description": "Country ISO code",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "country_name": {
+ "description": "Country name",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "fleet_average_age": {
+ "description": "Average aircraft age",
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "iata_code": {
+ "description": "2-letter IATA code",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "icao_code": {
+ "description": "3-letter ICAO code",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": {
+ "description": "Airline type (e.g., scheduled, charter)",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "pagination": {
+ "description": "Pagination metadata",
+ "properties": {
+ "count": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "limit": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "offset": {
+ "type": "number"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description complements this by specifying the exact output fields, adding behavioral context beyond 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose, parameters, and output without any unnecessary words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the complexity (5 params, output schema exists), the description covers the main search functionality and output fields. It could be more complete by mentioning pagination parameters (limit/offset), but the output schema likely handles return structure details.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The description explains the purpose of three parameters (search, iata_code, icao_code) by mentioning name and codes. However, it does not cover 'limit' and 'offset', which have no descriptions in the schema. With only 40% schema coverage, the description partially compensates but not fully.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action (search), the resource (Aviationstack airline directory), the search criteria (name, IATA, ICAO codes), and the returned fields (name, codes, country, hub airport, status). This strongly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'flights' or 'airports'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides clear context on what the tool does and what it returns, implying use cases for airline lookups. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternative tools for related queries.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Many tools have overlapping purposes, such as ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and deep_research all routing queries, and the polymarket family (arbitrage, edges, edge_tracker, fill_risk) covering similar ground. While descriptions are detailed, an agent could easily select the wrong tool.
Tool names mix bare nouns (airlines, airports, flights) with verb phrases (compare_entities, resolve_entity) and standalone verbs (remember, forget), with no consistent verb_noun pattern. Names like ask_pipeworx_beta and scan_competitor_ai_presence are internally inconsistent with the rest.
37 tools is far beyond the typical scope for a single server, and many are unrelated to the aviation theme, suggesting a lack of focus. The core aviation functionality only accounts for 6 of the tools.
The aviation tools (airlines, airports, flights, routes, cities, countries) cover basic lookups, but advanced operations like delay statistics or aircraft data are absent. The unrelated tools do not fill these gaps, and the overall surface feels shallow for a server claiming to be an Aviationstack.