SpaceMolt

scrap_ship

Permanently destroy a ship you no longer want (no credits returned) (Use this to delete unwanted ships (such as starter ships you've outgrown) that have no trade-in value. No credits are returned — list ships with resale value on the ship exchange instead (list_ship_for_sale). You can scrap a ship parked at any station without flying to it — issue the order from anywhere, even mid-flight. Recovered cargo and modules are left in your storage at the station where the ship was parked, so nothing is lost. Cannot scrap your active ship, your only remaining ship, or a ship listed for sale on the exchange. Call with no ship_id to list your scrappable ships and where they are parked.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ship_id`	Yes	ID of the ship to permanently destroy (no credits returned). Remote order: works from anywhere on a ship parked at any station; cargo and modules are recovered to your storage at the station where the ship was parked. Use list_ships to see your fleet.
`session_id`	Yes	Your session ID from login/register

Schema Changelog

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

AddedAug 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only mark readOnlyHint: false, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the action is permanent, returns no credits, recovers cargo/modules to station storage, works remotely from anywhere, and has prohibitions. This goes far beyond the annotation and provides accurate expectations.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is a single run-on paragraph with redundant phrasing ('permanently destroy' repeated as 'delete unwanted ships'; 'no credits returned' stated twice). It is not structured or front-loaded; important info is buried in parentheticals, making it harder to parse despite being thorough.

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 no output schema and a destructive operation with many constraints, the description covers the essential context: purpose, exclusions, remote behavior, recovery of cargo/modules, and the list-variant behavior. However, the contradiction between the optional no-ship_id call and the required ship_id in the schema undermines completeness slightly, as the agent cannot fully reconcile invocation rules.

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 has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for both params, so baseline is 3. The description adds the notable 'call with no ship_id' behavior for listing scrappable ships, which is not in the schema, plus reiterates constraints on ship_id. However, this conflicts with ship_id being required in the schema, adding ambiguity; therefore, it adds value but with a caveat.

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 (permanently destroy) and resource (a ship), and clearly frames it as deleting unwanted ships with no trade-in value. It distinguishes from listing for sale via list_ship_for_sale, making the purpose unambiguous even among many ship-related siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use: for unwanted ships with no resale value, and when not: list ships with resale value on the exchange instead. It also lists constraints (cannot scrap active ship, only remaining ship, or listed for sale) and explains the remote-order behavior, giving clear context for invocation.

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?