Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

flightaware-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

fa_count_flights

Read-only

Count flights matching a search query using simplified "-key value" syntax, returning only the total count for quick metrics without flight details.

Instructions

Count flights matching a query without returning the flights themselves. Returns { count }. Uses the SIMPLIFIED "-key value" syntax (same as fa_search_flights, NOT the structured grammar of fa_search_flights_advanced). Example: -airline UAL -belowAltitude 30000.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoResponse shape: "compact" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; "full" returns every field this server understands. compact strips image/avatar URLs from the response; "full" returns FlightAware's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which FlightAware fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.
queryYesSimplified "-key value" search string (same syntax as fa_search_flights), e.g. -airline UAL

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / view
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Response shape: \"compact\" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; \"full\" returns every field this server understands. compact strips image/avatar URLs from the response; \"full\" returns FlightAware's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which FlightAware fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.",
+  "enum": [
+    "compact",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond that: it returns only a count, deliberately does not return flight payloads, and uses a specific query grammar. It does not cover rate limits or freshness, but that is not critical for a simple count 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?

Four short sentences carry purpose, return shape, syntax constraints, and an example. There is no filler or repetition; every sentence contributes to correct invocation.

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?

For a tool with one required parameter, no output schema, and simple count semantics, the description is complete: it explains the return shape, the query syntax, and gives an example. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to decide when and how to call it.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a more detailed query example and explicitly warns against advanced syntax, but it largely restates the query parameter's schema text. The view parameter is left entirely to the schema, which already documents it fully.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Count flights matching a query') and clearly distinguishes itself from search tools by stating it does not return flights. It also narrows its syntax to the simplified form and names the advanced alternative it is not.

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 makes the count-only use case explicit ('without returning the flights themselves') and gives strong syntax guidance, including that fa_search_flights_advanced's grammar should not be used. It does not explicitly say 'use this when you only need a count and not flight data,' but the phrasing makes that clear.

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