Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Space Launch & Starlink Tracker

Space Launch & Starlink Tracker

by MAASAI-Labs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Next launch countdown

next_launch
Read-only

Get countdown and details for the next space launch, optionally filtered by mission, rocket, or provider.

Instructions

Countdown and details for the very next launch, optionally filtered (e.g. 'Starship', 'Rocket Lab').

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": "next_launch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tzNoIANA timezone for display, e.g. Africa/Lagos, America/New_York. UTC always shown too.
searchNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds that it targets the single very next launch and that 'UTC always shown too' appears in the schema rather than here; it doesn't describe auth, rate limits, or return shape. With annotations carrying the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the primary function and appends the optional filter with concrete examples. Nothing wasted.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a two-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and filtering but leaves sibling differentiation and the search parameter's semantics thin. Adequate but with clear gaps relative to the sibling tool set.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 50%: tz is documented in the schema, search is not (only maxLength). The description's filter examples ('Starship', 'Rocket Lab') add useful meaning for search but don't fully compensate for the undocumented parameter. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

Clear verb-like resource ('next launch') and stated scope ('countdown and details'), with the filter examples grounding what the tool returns. It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling 'upcoming_launches', so it falls short of a 5.

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 'optionally filtered' phrasing and examples imply when to pass a filter, but there's no guidance on when to use this versus 'upcoming_launches', which is the obvious alternative. Usage context is implied, not stated.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools