Live Flight Data
Server Details
Live flight departures and airport information
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 3.8/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools serve clearly distinct purposes: one provides static airport information, the other retrieves dynamic flight departures. There is no overlap or ambiguity.
Both tools follow the consistent verb_noun pattern 'get_<resource>', making them predictable and easy to understand.
With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a domain like live flight data, which typically includes arrivals, flight status by number, and more. However, the tools provided are core and functional.
The server lacks obvious essential tools such as getting arrivals, flight status by flight number, or airline information. The surface is significantly incomplete for a flight data service.
Available Tools
2 toolsget_airport_infoAInspect
Get airport information including name, city, country, timezone, and coordinates.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| iata | No | IATA airport code (default: JFK) | JFK |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the returned fields, but omits behavioral details such as error handling for invalid IATA codes, data freshness, or authentication requirements. Adequate for a simple lookup but minimal.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single concise sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and output, with no unnecessary words or redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers what it returns. It lacks specification on behavior for invalid inputs, but that is acceptable for a straightforward information retrieval tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'iata', providing default and description. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, only listing output fields. Score aligns with baseline.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly specifies the tool retrieves airport information including name, city, country, timezone, and coordinates. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'get_flight_departures' by focusing on static airport data rather than dynamic departures.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling. The description implies it is for general airport info, but does not mention any circumstances where one should prefer this tool over alternatives or avoid it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_flight_departuresAInspect
Get flight departures from an airport. Returns flight number, airline, destination, scheduled time, status, gate, and terminal.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| hours | No | Look-ahead window in hours (1-12, default: 6) | |
| airport | No | IATA airport code (default: JFK) | JFK |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavior. It lists returned fields but omits details like read-only nature, rate limits, or error handling. Basic but not rich.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single short sentence, no fluff. Could be structured with headings, but acceptable given simplicity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers key output fields and purpose. Lacks details on status values or pagination but is adequate.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. The tool description does not elaborate on the parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states it retrieves flight departures from an airport, specifying the verb 'Get' and the resource. It distinguishes from sibling tool get_airport_info which likely handles airport metadata.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The sibling tool is named but not contrasted, leaving the agent to infer usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!