Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

flightaware-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

fa_resolve_flight

Read-only

Resolve a flight ident or registration to its canonical form and alternate idents, requiring a Standard or Premium AeroAPI tier.

Instructions

Resolve a flight ident (designator/registration) to its canonical form and any alternate idents. NOTE: requires a Standard or Premium AeroAPI tier — the free Personal tier returns 401.

Input 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.
identYesFlight designator or registration to canonicalize
ident_typeNoDisambiguate how `ident` is interpreted

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.3.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / ident / pattern
      Previous value: -"^[A-Za-z0-9.-]+$"New value: +"^[A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9.-]*$"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. 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"
+}
  4. Addedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses a concrete auth constraint — Standard or Premium tier required, free Personal tier returns 401 — which is exactly the kind of operational context annotations cannot carry. It also describes the return payload shape, though it omits rate-limit or error-handling detail.

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?

Two sentences with zero padding: the purpose is front-loaded and the tier caveat follows. Every clause earns its place and nothing is redundant with the schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description takes on the burden of describing the return and does so (canonical form, alternate idents), and it flags the tier/auth failure mode. It is complete enough to call correctly; the only gap is richer detail on failure modes beyond the 401 case.

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 schema already documents ident, ident_type, and the view enum in detail (including the compact/full trade-off). The description's mention of "designator/registration" adds only marginal framing over the ident_type enum, so the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Resolve a flight ident") and even names what comes back (canonical form plus alternate idents), which lets an agent distinguish it from the flight-fetching siblings like fa_get_flights and fa_search_flights. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with fa_resolve_airport or the search tools, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 canonicalization goal implies the use case (normalize an ident before issuing other calls), which is a reasonable implied-usage signal. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no alternatives named, so an agent must infer that this precedes a lookup rather than replacing one.

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