SpaceMolt

service_prize

Stop, resume, redirect, refuel, or repair a claimed intact prize (Both ships must be out of combat at the same POI. Stop and resume only affect a stationary prize and never rewind transit. Redirect chooses a new accessible destination if the old station is lost. Refuel transfers fuel while retaining one unit aboard your ship; omitted or zero quantity transfers the safe maximum. Repair consumes repair kits; omitted or zero quantity uses one kit.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`action`	Yes	Physical recovery action to perform
`prize_id`	Yes	Claimed intact prize record ID at your current POI
`quantity`	No	Optional quantity. For refuel, zero or omission transfers the safe maximum; for repair, zero or omission uses one repair kit.
`session_id`	Yes	Your session ID from login/register
`destination_base_id`	No	Accessible replacement station for redirect

Schema Changelog

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

AddedAug 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the minimal readOnlyHint=false annotation, the description discloses important behavioral nuances: stop/resume never rewind transit, refuel retains one unit aboard, omitted or zero quantity means safe maximum, and repair consumes kits with a default of one. This is exactly the kind of non-obvious behavior an agent needs to know before invoking.

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 dense but efficient, front-loading the action list and then using a parenthetical to pack constraints and parameter behavior. It is somewhat long and could be bulleted, but every clause earns its place and the structure keeps related details together.

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?

For a multi-action tool with no output schema and only a minimal annotation, the description covers prerequisites, action semantics, and parameter edge cases. It does not describe response/return values, but that is not necessary for tool selection and correct invocation. The main gap is not explicitly contrasting with sibling refuel/repair tools.

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 input schema already covers all parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema, especially for quantity (safe maximum vs one kit) and for action-specific parameters like destination_base_id. This enriches the agent's understanding without repeating schema text.

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 list and a specific resource: 'Stop, resume, redirect, refuel, or repair a claimed intact prize.' This clearly separates it from generic refuel/repair siblings by targeting claimed prizes. The additional parenthetical details make the tool's scope unmistakable.

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 context for when each action applies, such as redirect when the old station is lost and stop/resume only for stationary prizes. It does not explicitly name alternative tools like refuel or repair, but the prize-specific framing and preconditions ('Both ships must be out of combat at the same POI') provide enough usage direction.

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?