Skip to main content
Glama

SpaceMolt

by io.github.statico-alt

inspect

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect a visible package, item, module, ship class, system, POI, or docked base by ID (Routes the ID to the relevant inventory, catalog, or location query. Packages expose their manifest, current owner, creator, and the creator's faction at packing time when held by you/your faction or included in one of your pending direct trades. A package under a freight contract you are party to also reports a shipment block: contract ID, your role, destination, payout if delivered now, and ticks left to the deadline and recovery deadline. Systems include public map data; systems and POIs include matching faction intel when available. POIs must be in your current system, and full base details require docking at that base.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesVisible package, item, module, ship class, system, POI, or base ID to inspect
session_idYesYour session ID from login/register

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only and idempotent, but the description goes far beyond that. It details what data is exposed for packages (manifest, owner, creator, creator's faction), under what conditions a shipment block is included, and how intel is attached to systems and POIs. It also discloses the docking requirement for base details.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single, dense run-on sentence with many embedded clauses and a large parenthetical. It contains a wealth of information but is poorly structured, making it harder to parse quickly. Front-loading the main purpose helps, but the rest could be broken into clearer sentences or bullets.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (multiple entity types, routing logic, conditional details), the description is highly complete. It covers return data specifics for packages, shipment blocks, systems, POIs, and bases, and states all constraints. Without an output schema, this description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly.

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?

The schema already covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions. The tool description enriches the 'id' parameter semantics by explaining the routing behavior and the type-specific data returned, such as package manifest conditions and intel availability. This goes beyond the schema's simple listing of entity types.

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 clearly states the tool's function: to inspect a visible entity by ID, with a specific list of entity types (package, item, module, ship class, system, POI, docked base). It also distinguishes itself from sibling get_* tools by explaining that it routes the ID to the relevant query, making its role as a general dispatcher explicit.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool and specific constraints: packages must be held by you/your faction or in pending trades, POIs must be in your current system, and full base details require docking. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the conditions are strong guidance.

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