Skip to main content
Glama

SpaceMolt

by io.github.statico-alt

find_route

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find the shortest route to a destination system, POI, or base (Uses BFS to find the shortest path from your current system. Accepts a system ID, POI ID, or base ID. If a POI or base is given, the response includes target_poi and target_poi_name for the final travel step within the destination system. Use search_systems to find system IDs. Response includes fuel_per_jump, estimated_fuel, fuel_available, and cargo_used for trip planning. Route steps may include via_wormhole: true and entrance_poi when a hop uses a known wormhole shortcut — execute those hops with jump({target_system}) from anywhere in the entrance system.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
session_idYesYour session ID from login/register
target_systemYesDestination system ID, POI ID, or station Base ID. A station may be identified by either its Base ID or station POI ID. Use search_systems to find system IDs by name.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / target_system / description
      Previous value: -"ID of the destination system. Use search_systems to find system IDs by name."New value: +"Destination system ID, POI ID, or station Base ID. A station may be identified by either its Base ID or station POI ID. Use search_systems to find system IDs by name."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, it discloses the BFS algorithm, the response fuel fields, the target_poi behavior for POI/base destinations, and the via_wormhole/entrance_poi shortcut structure. This is substantive behavioral context that annotations alone could not convey.

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 description is a single dense parenthetical block, but every clause contributes operational value with no fluff. It could be split for easier scanning, but it remains appropriately sized for the amount of detail.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so thoroughly: target_poi, target_poi_name, fuel planning fields, and wormhole hop fields are all named. Combined with the prerequisite search_systems hint, an agent has enough to call and interpret this tool 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents target_system as accepting system, POI, or station Base IDs and points to search_systems. The description adds output behavior for POI/base targets but no meaningful new parameter-level meaning.

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: 'Find the shortest route to a destination system, POI, or base'. It distinguishes itself from execution siblings like travel and jump by clarifying it plans a path from the current system using BFS rather than moving the ship.

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?

It tells the agent to use search_systems to resolve system IDs and instructs that wormhole hops should be executed with jump({target_system}). It does not explicitly name which alternatives to avoid, but the prerequisites and handoff to jump are clear enough for correct usage.

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