Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

flightaware-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

fa_get_flight_position

Read-only

Get the most recent position of an in-air flight by providing its fa_flight_id.

Instructions

Get the most recent reported position for an in-air flight by fa_flight_id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesfa_flight_id of the flight
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.

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. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description carries a reduced burden. It adds the 'in-air' and 'most recent' constraints, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not disclose behaviors like error handling for non-in-air flights or unknown IDs, and the openWorldHint isn't elaborated on in the text.

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 immediately states the purpose without any filler. Every word carries meaning, and it is appropriately sized for a simple get operation.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple lookup tool with no output schema and robust parameter documentation in the schema, the description is largely sufficient. It captures the core action and constraints. The only gap is the lack of explicit differentiation from similar siblings, but given the clarity of purpose, this does not significantly impair an agent's ability to call it correctly.

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%, with both parameters (id and view) documented in detail. The view parameter's description already explains the compact/full distinction and the lack of field projection. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get the most recent reported position for an in-air flight by fa_flight_id.' This clearly distinguishes it from similar siblings like fa_get_flight_track (full track), fa_get_flight_route (route), and fa_search_flight_positions (search), by focusing on the latest position for an in-air flight only.

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 description implies when to use the tool (when you need the latest reported position of an in-air flight) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria. It does not reference any sibling tools or say when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer based on naming and context.

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