Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

flightaware-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

fa_resolve_flight

Read-only

Resolve a flight ident (designator or registration) to its canonical form and any alternate idents. Helps ensure accurate flight tracking and lookup. Requires 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

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

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

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The readOnlyHint already communicates safety, and the description adds useful operational behavior: resolving to canonical form, returning alternate idents, and requiring a paid tier. That is sufficient disclosure for a simple lookup-style 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?

The description is concise and information-dense: a single clear sentence plus a necessary tier warning. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Given a complete schema and read-only annotation, the description supplies the core semantics, output concept, and an important access constraint. It lacks only an explicit output shape or example, but that is not essential for this tool's simplicity.

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?

All parameters are already documented in the schema, including the ident_type enum and the default behavior. The description adds little parameter-level detail beyond naming the identifiers, so it does not materially improve on schema coverage.

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 identifies the operation ('resolve'), the resource ('flight ident'), and the outcome ('canonical form and any alternate idents'). It is unambiguous and distinguishes this from airport or operator resolution tools.

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 purpose and intended input are clear, and the tier restriction (Standard/Premium vs. free tier returning 401) is a useful selection cue. However, it does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools or state when not to use it.

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