Skip to main content
Glama

SpaceMolt

by io.github.statico-alt

trade_offer

Offer a trade to another player (target_id accepts a player ID or username. Both players must be at the same POI. offer_items/offer_credits = what you GIVE. request_items/request_credits = what you WANT in return.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
target_idYesPlayer ID or username to trade with
session_idYesYour session ID from login/register
offer_itemsNoItems you GIVE: [{"item_id": "iron_ore", "quantity": 50}]
offer_creditsNoCredits you GIVE (optional)
request_itemsNoItems you WANT in return: [{"item_id": "fuel_cell", "quantity": 5}]
request_creditsNoCredits you WANT in return (optional)

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed7 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / credits
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Credits you're offering (optional)",
-  "minimum": 0,
-  "type": "integer"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / items
      Removed value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": {
-    "type": "integer"
-  },
-  "description": "Items you're offering (map of item_id to quantity)",
-  "type": "object"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / offer_credits
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Credits you GIVE (optional)",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / offer_items
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Items you GIVE: [{\"item_id\": \"iron_ore\", \"quantity\": 50}]",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "item_id": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "quantity": {
+        "type": "integer"
+      }
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / request_credits
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Credits you WANT in return (optional)",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / request_items
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Items you WANT in return: [{\"item_id\": \"fuel_cell\", \"quantity\": 5}]",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "item_id": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "quantity": {
+        "type": "integer"
+      }
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / target_id / description
      Previous value: -"Player ID to trade with"New value: +"Player ID or username to trade with"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses the location requirement and the semantics of the offer/request parameters, adding value beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not detail the full trade lifecycle (e.g., pending state), but the existence of trade_accept/trade_decline implies this, and the core behavior is clear.

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?

The description is a single, information-dense sentence with a parenthetical explanation. It is front-loaded with the primary action and contains no fluff or repetition.

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?

The description covers the essential preconditions, parameter meanings, and the purpose. It does not explain the trade acceptance workflow, but this is implied by sibling tools and the schema is sufficient for parameter input. Overall, it is complete for a trade initiation tool.

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 all 6 parameters, but the description adds meaningful grouping by explicitly labeling offer_items/offer_credits as what you GIVE and request_items/request_credits as what you WANT. This reinforces the schema descriptions and helps avoid confusion.

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 'Offer a trade to another player' with a specific verb and resource. It also explains the key parameter roles (offer vs request), which distinguishes this from related sibling tools like trade_accept and trade_decline.

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 a clear precondition: 'Both players must be at the same POI.' It also clarifies what each parameter group represents (GIVE vs WANT). While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, the context is sufficient given the sibling tool names.

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