Skip to main content
Glama

SpaceMolt

by io.github.statico-alt

cancel_commission

Cancel a pending or in-progress ship commission (Cancel a commission that hasn't finished yet. While the yard is still sourcing, all unspent or recovered sourcing funds, labor, and the yard fee are refunded, and all gathered materials return to station storage. After sourcing, the yard fee plus 50% of the remaining paid build cost is refunded. Fully player-supplied orders return all requirements; partial-sourcing orders return the materials you initially contributed. Faction-funded cancellations return materials to faction storage and apply the faction cancellation policy.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
session_idYesYour session ID from login/register
commission_idYesID of the commission to cancel

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The annotation only indicates readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries the burden of explaining side effects. It does so thoroughly: refund rules during sourcing, refund rules after sourcing, player-supplied vs. partial-sourcing material returns, and faction-funded cancellation behavior with policy application. This is exactly the kind of consequence disclosure an agent needs before invoking a mutating tool.

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 main action is front-loaded in the first clause, and the lengthy parenthetical is dense with distinct refund scenarios rather than filler. It is longer than average, but the complexity of the cancellation policy justifies the length; a slightly more structured breakdown of the phases would improve scannability.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description covers all major contingencies an agent must understand before calling the tool: pre-sourcing vs. post-sourcing refunds, fully player-supplied vs. partial-sourcing handling, and faction-funded storage/policy effects. The information needed to predict the outcome of a cancellation is present and complete for the tool's complexity.

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%: both session_id and commission_id are already described in the input schema as 'Your session ID from login/register' and 'ID of the commission to cancel.' The description adds no additional param-specific meaning, such as required formats or where to obtain the commission_id, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Cancel a pending or in-progress ship commission.' It clearly identifies the target domain (ship commissions) and distinguishes it from trade-order cancellation siblings like cancel_order and cancel_ship_buy_order by always qualifying the resource as a ship commission.

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 gives clear temporal context: the tool is for commissions that are 'pending' or 'in-progress' and explicitly notes 'a commission that hasn't finished yet.' This conveys when the tool is applicable and implies that completed commissions are not eligible, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclude them by name.

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

All SpaceMolt toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly distinct, targeting specific actions and resources. A few overlaps exist (e.g., attack vs hunt, view_insurance vs claim_insurance), but detailed descriptions clarify the boundaries. The scale makes selection harder, but each tool has a clear purpose.

Naming Consistency4/5

The majority use a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., create_buy_order, get_cargo, accept_mission). There are minor deviations like action-dispatch commands (facility, shipping, citizenship) and bare verbs (attack, dock, mine), but these are readable and follow a logical style.

Tool Count1/5

With 212 tools, the server far exceeds any reasonable scope for an MCP. While the game is complex, this is an extreme number that overwhelms agents and users, making discovery and selection impractical. The calibration considers 25+ already too many, and 212 is extreme.

Completeness5/5

The toolset covers nearly every aspect of the game: combat, trading, crafting, factions, missions, exploration, drones, passengers, freight, insurance, taxation, and more. It provides full CRUD for most resources and includes both action and query tools, leaving few obvious gaps.

Resources