Skip to main content
Glama
IBM

Chuk MCP Maritime Archives

by IBM
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Hybrid

maritime_search_voyages

Search historical maritime voyages across Dutch, English, Portuguese, Spanish, and Swedish archives using filters like ship name, captain, date range, ports, route, or fate. Paginated results for easy browsing.

Instructions

Search for maritime voyages matching one or more criteria.

Queries multiple maritime archives for voyages. All search parameters are optional and combined with AND logic. Supports cursor-based pagination for browsing large result sets.

Archives available: - das: Dutch Asiatic Shipping (VOC), 1595-1795 - eic: English East India Company, 1600-1874 - carreira: Portuguese Carreira da India, 1497-1835 - galleon: Spanish Manila Galleon, 1565-1815 - soic: Swedish East India Company, 1731-1813

Args: ship_name: Ship name or partial name (case-insensitive) captain: Captain / skipper name or partial name date_range: Date range as "YYYY/YYYY" or "YYYY-MM-DD/YYYY-MM-DD" departure_port: Departure port name or partial name destination_port: Destination port name or partial name route: Route keyword (searches departure, destination, and summary) fate: Voyage outcome - completed, wrecked, captured, scuttled, missing archive: Restrict to specific archive - das, eic, carreira, galleon, soic (default: all) max_results: Maximum results per page (default: 50, max: 500) cursor: Pagination cursor from a previous result's next_cursor field output_mode: Response format - "json" (default) or "text"

Returns: JSON or text with matching voyages and pagination metadata

Tips for LLMs: - Start broad (ship_name only) and narrow down with additional filters - Use date_range to focus on a specific century or decade - Set fate="wrecked" to find shipwreck voyages - Use archive="eic" for English East India Company voyages - If has_more is true, pass next_cursor as cursor to get the next page - total_count shows how many records match before pagination - Follow up with maritime_get_voyage for full voyage details

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ship_nameNo
captainNo
date_rangeNo
departure_portNo
destination_portNo
routeNo
fateNo
archiveNo
max_resultsNo
cursorNo
output_modeNojson

Tool Definition Quality

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that the tool queries multiple archives, uses AND logic, supports cursor pagination, and returns JSON or text. It also describes response fields like has_more and total_count. No destructive behavior is indicated, and no contradictions exist.

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 (intro, archives, args, returns, tips) and is front-loaded. While slightly long, it earns its length given the complexity of parameters and archives.

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 11 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers all necessary information: parameter semantics, pagination, response structure, and usage tips. It feels complete for an LLM to use 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description fully documents all 11 parameters with formats, defaults, and allowed values (e.g., archive options, date range format, fate values). This exceeds the schema's bare types.

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 it searches for maritime voyages matching criteria, lists multiple archives, and provides examples of usage. It distinguishes itself from sibling search tools (e.g., maritime_search_cargo) by focusing specifically on voyages.

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 tips for LLMs on how to narrow down searches and mentions following up with maritime_get_voyage for full details, implying when to use that tool. However, it does not explicitly compare to other search tools or state when not to use this 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