recent_fireballsNASA/JPL CNEOS — most recent atmospheric fireballs/bolides detected by U.S. Government sensors, with date, radiated and total impact energy (kilotons of TNT), location, altitude, and velocity. Keyless.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max events, default 15, max 100. | |
| min_energy | No | Optional minimum total impact energy in kilotons of TNT. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "limit": 15
+ },
+ {
+ "limit": 25,
+ "min_energy": 5
+ }
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, open-world, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds transparency by noting 'Keyless' (no authentication) and 'most recent' implying dynamic data. No contradictions with 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?
Single sentence that is front-loaded with the source and key details. Every word serves a purpose with no redundancy.
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?
Lists output fields but does not specify output format (e.g., list of objects) or ordering. Given no output schema and moderate complexity, the description adequately covers what the tool provides.
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?
Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema; it mentions energy in kilotons of TNT which is already in the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 tool returns recent atmospheric fireballs/bolides from NASA/JPL CNEOS, listing specific data fields like date, energy, location, altitude, velocity. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like close_approaches or impact_risk by focusing on confirmed fireball events.
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 implies usage for retrieving recent fireball data but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like close_approaches or impact_risk. No exclusion criteria or scenarios are mentioned.
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.
Multiple tools overlap in purpose, especially the ask_pipeworx variants and the polymarket_* tools. An agent would struggle to distinguish between similar functions, increasing the risk of selecting the wrong tool.
Tool names use inconsistent conventions: some are snake_case (close_approaches), some are verb_noun (generate_llms_txt), and others mix styles (ask_pipeworx vs. deep_research). No clear pattern is maintained across the set.
At 35 tools, the server is bloated and unfocused. The majority of tools are unrelated to the 'Jpl Ssd' domain, which only has 4 relevant tools. The count is far too high for the stated purpose.
The JPL SSD coverage is minimal (only 4 tools), missing key functionalities like detailed object queries or bulk downloads. The remaining tools cover unrelated domains, so the surface is both incomplete for its primary domain and cluttered with off-topic tools.