Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

flightaware-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

fa_search_flights_advanced

Read-only

Search flights using a structured query language, enabling precise filtering by flight ID, origin, destination, altitude, and status via operators like match, range, and comparison.

Instructions

Search flights using AeroAPI's full structured query language (more expressive than fa_search_flights). The query is a space-separated list of {operator key value} predicates, e.g. "{match ident UAL*} {> alt 300} {= dest KLAX}". Operators: true/false/null/notnull/=/!=/</>/<=/>=, match/notmatch (case-insensitive wildcards), range (two values), in/orig_or_dest/aircraftType/ident/ident_or_reg ({a b c} value lists), airline (1=airline, 0=GA). Common keys: ident, orig, dest (ICAO codes), aircraftType, alt (hundreds of ft), prefix, lifeguard, cancelled, arrived.

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 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. Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / query / description
      Previous value: -"Boolean query expression"New value: +"Structured \"{operator key value}\" query, e.g. {match ident UAL*} {> alt 300}"
  4. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already supply readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description is not burdened with that baseline. It adds substantial behavioral detail about how the DSL is parsed: operator syntax, wildcard matching, units for altitude, and the meaning of the airline operator. It does not discuss error behavior or responses, but the DSL semantics are the crucial behavioral aspect here.

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 dense but every clause earns its place: the purpose statement, a worked example, the operator enumerations, and a list of common keys. It is front-loaded with the core distinction and the grammar list follows. No filler or repetition.

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 search tool the main challenge is the query language, and the description attacks that thoroughly. Pagination, view behavior, and max_pages are handled in the schema, so the description does not need to repeat them. It does omit error handling and a note about result shape, but given the annotations and the schema I consider this a good coverage without major gaps.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The schema only describes query as a 'structured query string'. The description gives this parameter real meaning: it specifies the '{operator key value}' format, enumerates all operator types, includes a concrete example, and explains common keys and value units. This is a high-value addition to a parameter that would otherwise be opaque.

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 the exact resource (flights) and action (search), and explicitly positions itself against the sibling fa_search_flights ('more expressive than fa_search_flights'). This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinct from its main alternative.

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 names the semantic sibling fa_search_flights and calls itself more expressive, giving the agent good context for when this tool might be chosen over the simpler one. It does not provide an explicit 'use this when, else use that' rule, but the comparison is a strong usage signal.

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