Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Meteors

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Fireballs

get_fireballs
Read-onlyIdempotent

Track recent meteor impacts and atmospheric explosions detected by US government sensors. Returns impact energy, radiated energy, velocity, altitude, and geographic location.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "limit": 10
    },
    "name": "get_fireballs"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of fireball events to return (default 10, max 100).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYesTotal number of fireball events returned
fireballsYesArray of fireball event records

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Total number of fireball events returned",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "fireballs": {
+      "description": "Array of fireball event records",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "altitude_km": {
+            "description": "Altitude of the event in kilometers",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "date": {
+            "description": "Date of the fireball event",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "energy_GJ": {
+            "description": "Impact energy in gigajoules",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "latitude": {
+            "description": "Latitude of the impact location",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "latitude_dir": {
+            "description": "Latitude direction (N/S)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "longitude": {
+            "description": "Longitude of the impact location",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "longitude_dir": {
+            "description": "Longitude direction (E/W)",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "radiated_energy_J": {
+            "description": "Radiated energy in joules",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "velocity_km_s": {
+            "description": "Velocity of the fireball in km/s",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "count",
+    "fireballs"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "limit": 10
+  },
+  {
+    "limit": 50
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, covering core safety. The description adds that data comes from US government sensors and lists returned fields, providing some additional behavioral context. However, it does not mention rate limits, data freshness, or that the result set may vary (open world). The description does not contradict 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?

Two sentences with no unnecessary words. The first sentence front-loads the purpose; the second sentence succinctly lists return fields. Every word is informative and earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 optional param, no required fields, output schema exists), the description is reasonably complete. It identifies the data source (US government sensors) and return fields, which is helpful. It omits pagination or empty result behavior, but these are minor given the output schema. The description adequately complements the structured fields.

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% with a clear description for the 'limit' parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides (default 10, max 100). Thus, the description adds marginal value over schema alone, meeting the baseline.

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 states the tool tracks recent meteor impacts and atmospheric explosions, returning specific data fields. While it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_close_approaches or get_neo_feed, the focus on 'impacts' and 'explosions' implies a distinct scope. A more precise verb like 'retrieve' would improve clarity, but purpose is not vague.

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 implies usage for tracking recent meteor impacts but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_close_approaches for asteroid close approaches, get_neo_feed for near-Earth objects). There are no exclusions or context about prerequisites, so the agent must infer from the description alone.

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

All Meteors 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