Skip to main content
Glama
IBM

Chuk MCP Maritime Archives

by IBM

maritime_export_speeds

Export raw speed samples with full metadata for statistical analysis. Supports filtering by voyage, date, location, and wind conditions for flexible grouping and testing.

Instructions

Export raw speed samples for downstream statistical analysis.

Returns individual speed records with full metadata (voyage_id, year, month, direction, nationality, ship_name, wind data) so models can perform arbitrary grouping and statistical tests.

Unlike maritime_aggregate_track_speeds which groups and summarises, this tool returns the underlying data. Essential for analyses requiring non-contiguous year comparisons (e.g. ENSO phase classification, volcanic event detection, arbitrary epoch testing).

Args: lat_min/lat_max/lon_min/lon_max: Bounding box nationality: Filter by nationality code year_start/year_end: Filter by year range direction: Filter by "eastbound" or "westbound" month_start/month_end: Month filter (supports wrap-around) aggregate_by: "voyage" (one mean speed per voyage, recommended for statistical independence) or "observation" (each daily speed with position and wind data) min_speed_km_day: Minimum speed filter (default: 5.0) max_speed_km_day: Maximum speed filter (default: 400.0) wind_force_min/wind_force_max: Beaufort force bounds max_results: Records per page (default: 500). Use with offset for pagination through large result sets. offset: Skip this many records (default: 0). Use next_offset from previous response to get the next page. fields: Comma-separated list of fields to include in output. Observation fields: voyage_id, date, year, month, day, direction, speed_km_day, nationality, ship_name, lat, lon, wind_force, wind_direction. Voyage fields: voyage_id, year, month, direction, speed_km_day, nationality, ship_name, n_observations. Omit for all fields. output_mode: Response format - "json" (default), "text", or "csv". Use "csv" for compact tabular output (~3-4x fewer tokens than JSON). CSV includes a # metadata header.

Returns: JSON, text, or CSV with speed samples and metadata

Tips for LLMs: - Use output_mode="csv" to reduce token usage by ~3-4x - Combine fields="voyage_id,year,speed_km_day" with csv for minimal token footprint (~10 tokens/row vs ~50 in JSON) - Use aggregate_by="observation" to get individual dated records with full date (ISO YYYY-MM-DD), lat, lon, wind data — essential for lunar phase, tidal, or day-level temporal analyses - Use aggregate_by="voyage" for statistically independent samples - Each observation-level sample includes date, year, month, day for precise temporal correlation (e.g. lunar phase, tidal cycles) - Combine with known ENSO chronology to classify years and compute El Nino vs La Nina vs Neutral speed distributions - For tidal analysis: export observations in narrow channels (e.g. Mozambique Channel lat -26/-12, lon 35/45), use date field to compute lunar phase, correlate with speed - For Laki 1783: compare 1782-1784 samples vs surrounding years - Paginate large results: check has_more and use next_offset - Default page size is 500 records; adjust max_results as needed

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lat_minNo
lat_maxNo
lon_minNo
lon_maxNo
nationalityNo
year_startNo
year_endNo
directionNo
month_startNo
month_endNo
aggregate_byNovoyage
min_speed_km_dayNo
max_speed_km_dayNo
wind_force_minNo
wind_force_maxNo
max_resultsNo
offsetNo
fieldsNo
output_modeNojson
Behavior4/5

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 that the tool returns raw speed records with full metadata, supports pagination (max_results, offset, next_offset), and offers different aggregation modes. It does not mention potential side effects (e.g., no destructive actions), but the non-destructive nature is clear. Some additional details like rate limits are missing, but overall transparency is high.

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 well-structured with clear sections (Args, Returns, Tips for LLMs) and front-loads the purpose. While it is lengthy due to comprehensive parameter explanations and usage tips, each sentence adds value. The structure aids readability, but some trimming of redundant tips (e.g., multiple examples of pagination) could improve conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (19 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is remarkably complete. It covers all parameters, explains return formats (JSON, text, CSV), pagination mechanism, and provides concrete analysis examples. The absence of an output schema is compensated by a clear description of returned fields for each mode. The description leaves little ambiguity for an AI agent to select and use the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0% parameter coverage (no descriptions), but the description provides extensive semantics for all 19 parameters. It explains each parameter's purpose, default values, and usage tips (e.g., 'aggregate_by: "voyage" (one mean speed per voyage, recommended for statistical independence)'). It also clarifies the 'fields' parameter with a detailed list of available fields for different aggregation modes. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 uses the verb 'export' and clearly identifies the resource as 'raw speed samples'. It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool 'maritime_aggregate_track_speeds', stating 'Unlike... which groups and summarises, this tool returns the underlying data.' This provides a specific verb+resource and differentiates from alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives explicit usage context: 'Essential for analyses requiring non-contiguous year comparisons... ENJO phase classification, volcanic event detection'. It also provides 'Tips for LLMs' with concrete scenarios (e.g., tidal analysis, Laki 1783) and recommendations on output_mode, fields, and pagination. This fully guides when and how to use the tool.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/IBM/chuk-mcp-maritime-archives'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server