Skip to main content
Glama

clarke_list_satellites

List GEO satellites from the UCS Satellite Database, optionally filtered by operator or owner country. Returns up to limit rows (default 100; max 1000).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "clarke_list_satellites"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
operatorNo
ownerCountryNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose two useful behavioral facts: results are capped ('up to `limit` rows') and the hard ceiling is 1000, which signals truncation risk. It says nothing about auth, ordering, or what fields come back, leaving meaningful gaps for an unannotated tool.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the core purpose and result shape front-loaded and the limit constraint following. Every clause carries information.

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 simple read-only list tool with no output schema and only three optional parameters, the description covers purpose, filters, and result row cap adequately. The main omission is what a row contains and in what order results are returned, which an agent might reasonably want.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate — and it does mention all three parameters, including the default (100) and maximum (1000) for `limit` and the distinct semantics of `operator` vs `ownerCountry`. It stops short of adding format or matching-behavior detail (e.g., exact vs partial match), which the schema's regex pattern does not convey.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List GEO satellites') plus the data source (UCS Satellite Database) and the two filterable dimensions. The resource is clearly distinct from the sibling tools (slots, terminals, deltas), though the description never explicitly contrasts with them.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'optionally filtered by operator or owner country' implies when the filters are useful, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives among the clarke_list_* siblings. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.