Skip to main content
Glama

fa_search_flight_positions

Read-only

Search live flight positions using structured {operator key value} queries, returning position points to locate aircraft by criteria such as ident or altitude.

Instructions

Search live flight POSITIONS using the structured "{operator key value}" query language (same grammar as fa_search_flights_advanced — NOT the simplified "-key value" syntax). Returns position points rather than flight summaries. Example: {match ident UAL*} {> alt 300}.

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.
queryYesStructured "{operator key value}" query, e.g. {match ident UAL*} {> alt 300}
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 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"
  2. 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"
      +}
  3. 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
  4. Addedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds 'live' semantics and the return-shape distinction, but does not disclose details like per-page billing or external API interaction beyond what the schema already notes. No contradiction with annotations.

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 two focused sentences plus an example, with the action and resource front-loaded. Every clause earns its place, and there is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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?

All four parameters are fully documented in the schema and the description supplies the essential query-grammar context. The main remaining gap is that return values are described only at a high level ('position points'), with no output schema to fill in the shape, but this is still sufficient for correct selection and invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by disambiguating the query grammar and reinforcing it with a concrete example, which is especially useful for the structured-language parameter. view, cursor, and max_pages are already well documented in the schema.

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 it searches live flight positions and, crucially, says it returns position points rather than flight summaries. This distinguishes it from summary-returning sibling tools like fa_search_flights_advanced even before looking at schemas.

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?

It gives explicit query-syntax guidance: use the structured {operator key value} grammar, same as fa_search_flights_advanced, and explicitly warns against the simplified '-key value' syntax. It does not enumerate every when-to-use/when-not-to-use case, but the position-points-vs-summaries contrast makes the main selection criterion clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.