SpaceMolt

faction_query_intel

Read-onlyIdempotent

Query your faction's intel database, or an allied faction's (L1 (Intel Terminal): filter by system_id or system_name. L2 (Intel Center): additionally filter by resource_type, poi_type, empire. Paginate with offset and limit (default 50, max 100). Does not require docking. Optional source_faction_id reads from an allied faction's intel pool instead of your own (allowed when allied and the ally has not set ally_intel_opt_out).)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max results (default 50, max 100)
`offset`	No	Pagination offset
`poi_type`	No	Filter by POI type (requires L2 Intel Center)
`system_id`	No	Filter by system ID
`session_id`	Yes	Your session ID from login/register
`system_name`	No	Filter by system name (case-insensitive partial match)
`resource_type`	No	Filter by resource type (requires L2 Intel Center)
`source_faction_id`	No	Optional ally faction whose intel pool to read (defaults to own faction). Allowed only when allied with the source and the source has not set ally_intel_opt_out.

Schema Changelog

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

Changed3 schema fields changedAug 14, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / limit

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Max results (default 50, max 100)",
+  "maximum": 100,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / offset

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Pagination offset",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / source_faction_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional ally faction whose intel pool to read (defaults to own faction). Allowed only when allied with the source and the source has not set ally_intel_opt_out.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedFeb 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds value by disclosing that docking is not required, L2 access is needed for certain filters, and allied reads are subject to ally_intel_opt_out. This goes 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences are dense but efficient, with the core action stated first and all details earning their place. No redundancy or filler.

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?

Covers access levels, filters, pagination, docking, and allied constraints. Missing only a description of return format, but with no output schema this is a minor gap given the description's quality.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds meaning by grouping filters by access level (L1 vs L2), explaining offset/limit defaults, and clarifying the source_faction_id condition. This enriches the parameter understanding.

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 uses a specific verb ('Query') and resource ('faction's intel database'), and immediately distinguishes from siblings like faction_query_trade_intel by scope (own or allied faction). It clearly conveys the tool's function.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use: explains L1 vs L2 filter availability, pagination parameters, docking requirement, and allied access conditions. Does not explicitly name alternative tools but context is strong.

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

All SpaceMolt tools Inspect

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

Need Help?