Skip to main content
Glama

SpaceMolt

by io.github.statico-alt

view_storage

Read-onlyIdempotent

View your storage at a station (Shows items and ships stored at a station. Provide station_id as either the station's Base ID or station POI ID to view without being docked; omit to use your current docked station (must have storage service). Every response carries a 'locations' array naming each station where you hold items or parked ships, with base_id, base_name, system, system_name, item_count, and ship_count. Undocked with no station_id, the command returns that summary with an empty base_id instead of a 'not_docked' error.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
session_idYesYour session ID from login/register
station_idNoOptional: station Base ID or station POI ID to view storage at without being docked. If omitted while docked, uses the current station. If omitted while undocked, returns a summary of every station where you hold items or ships.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / station_id / description
      Previous value: -"Optional: station ID to view storage at without being docked. If omitted while docked, uses the current station. If omitted while undocked, returns a summary of every station where you hold items or ships."New value: +"Optional: station Base ID or station POI ID to view storage at without being docked. If omitted while docked, uses the current station. If omitted while undocked, returns a summary of every station where you hold items or ships."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / station_id / description
      Previous value: -"Optional: station ID to view storage at without being docked. If omitted, must be docked and uses the current station."New value: +"Optional: station ID to view storage at without being docked. If omitted while docked, uses the current station. If omitted while undocked, returns a summary of every station where you hold items or ships."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and idempotent, but the description adds substantial non-obvious behavior: the undocked no-station_id case returns a 'locations' summary with an empty base_id instead of an error. It also details the response fields (base_id, base_name, system, system_name, item_count, ship_count), which goes well beyond what annotations provide.

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 informative but somewhat redundant at the start: 'View your storage at a station' and 'Shows items and ships stored at a station' repeat similar information. It also relies on heavy nested parentheses, making it less scannable than it could be. The content is valuable, but restructuring into clear sentences would improve readability.

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 accounts for both invocation modes and describes the response format in detail, which is essential given the absence of an output schema. The only slight gap is that the exact structure of the station-specific storage detail (when station_id is provided) is less explicitly specified than the summary array, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 fully documents both parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful extra semantics for station_id by specifying that it can be either the station's Base ID or POI ID, and by clarifying the omission behavior in both docked and undocked states. This exceeds the schema's basic 'optional' label.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: viewing a player's storage at a station, including items and ships. It is specific about the verb and resource, and the 'your' phrasing implies personal storage. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like view_faction_storage, so it lacks direct sibling distinction.

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 invocation guidance: use station_id to view without docking, omit it while docked to use the current station, and it explains the undocked-without-id summary behavior. It also mentions the storage service requirement. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of full sibling routing.

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