Skip to main content
Glama

launches

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Upcoming Launches

get_upcoming_launches
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch the next scheduled rocket launches from Launch Library 2. Returns launch name, NET (no-earlier-than) time, status, launch pad, rocket type, and mission description. Default 10 results.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of launches to return (default 10)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
totalYesTotal count of upcoming launches available
launchesYesList of upcoming launches

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "launches": {
+      "description": "List of upcoming launches",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "id": {
+            "description": "Launch Library 2 launch UUID",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "location": {
+            "description": "Launch location/facility name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "location_country": {
+            "description": "Launch location country code",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "mission_description": {
+            "description": "Mission objectives and details",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "mission_name": {
+            "description": "Mission name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "mission_type": {
+            "description": "Mission type classification",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "description": "Launch name",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "net": {
+            "description": "Scheduled launch date/time (ISO 8601)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "pad_name": {
+            "description": "Launch pad name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "rocket_name": {
+            "description": "Rocket full name or configuration name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "status": {
+            "description": "Launch status name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "status_description": {
+            "description": "Detailed status description",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "id",
+          "name"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "total": {
+      "description": "Total count of upcoming launches available",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "total",
+    "launches"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "limit": 10
+  },
+  {
+    "limit": 5
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive hints. The description adds value by specifying the data source (Launch Library 2), default result count, and the exact fields returned, going beyond the annotations. No contradictions found.

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences communicate purpose, source, output fields, and default behavior without redundancy or fluff. Every clause earns its place.

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 simple read-only tool with one optional parameter, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description fully covers purpose, result contents, and defaults. No significant gaps remain for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 covers the sole parameter 'limit' with its default (10) and meaning. The description repeats 'Default 10 results' but adds no new semantics. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('next scheduled rocket launches from Launch Library 2'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_past_launches and search_launches. It also enumerates return fields, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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?

The description establishes clear context: this tool is for retrieving upcoming launch schedules. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or when not to use it, so it falls just short of the 'explicit alternatives' bar for a 5.

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

All launches 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