Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

flightaware-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

fa_get_airport_flights

Read-only

Retrieve an airport's live flight board, including all flights or filtered by arrivals, departures, scheduled arrivals, or scheduled departures, using an ICAO, IATA, or LID code.

Instructions

Get a flight board for an airport: all flights, or just arrivals/departures/scheduled_arrivals/scheduled_departures.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesAirport code (ICAO/IATA/LID)
endNoISO-8601 end of the time window
typeNoRestrict to airline or GA traffic
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.
boardNoWhich board to fetch (default: all)all
startNoISO-8601 start of the time window
cursorNoOpaque paging cursor from a previous response's links.next
max_pagesNoMax pages to fetch, 1-20 (AeroAPI default: 1). Capped at 20 since AeroAPI bills per page.

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. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.3.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / max_pages / description
      Previous value: -"Max pages to fetch (AeroAPI default: 1)"New value: +"Max pages to fetch, 1-20 (AeroAPI default: 1). Capped at 20 since AeroAPI bills per page."
    • changedInput schema / properties / max_pages / maximum
      Previous value: -9007199254740991New value: +20
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows this is a read-oriented, open-world operation. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond that: it does not describe response shape, paging behavior, data freshness, or what the open-world annotation implies in practice.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that names the resource and the key choice of board type. It contains no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail, and every word contributes to understanding what the tool does.

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?

The tool has 8 parameters and no output schema, and the description covers only the board selection dimension. The schema handles parameter documentation, and annotations handle side-effect safety, but the description leaves gaps around time-window semantics, paging, response contents, and how this relates to sibling airport tools.

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 parameters are already fully documented in the schema. The description's mention of arrivals/departures mirrors the board enum in the schema without adding meaning. The especially nuanced view parameter is explained only in the schema, not in the description.

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 a specific verb and resource: "Get a flight board for an airport." It further disambiguates the tool by enumerating the supported board variants (arrivals, departures, scheduled arrivals, scheduled departures), which distinguishes it from sibling airport tools like fa_get_airport_flight_counts and fa_get_airport_routes.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as fa_get_airport_flight_counts, fa_get_airport, or fa_search_flights. There are no excluded cases, no preferred context, and no mention of the sibling tools that would make the selection decision explicit.

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