Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
loosephoto

space-finder-mcp

by loosephoto
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

planetary_evidence

Retrieve scientific literature evidence for planets, moons, asteroids, and space missions, including Japanese sources, with citation counts, dates, and DOI links for research validation.

Instructions

天体（惑星・衛星・小天体・探査機）の文献的な裏づけをまとめて返すツール。

例:「火星」「エウロパ」「タイタン」「はやぶさ2」「リュウグウ」「ベスタ」

Args: object_name: 天体・ミッション名（日本語可）。 limit: 返す最大件数（1〜25、既定 8）。 include_japanese: 日本語文献（JAXAリポジトリ・J-STAGE・CiNii）も検索するか（既定 true）。 sort: "citations"（既定・被引用数順）/ "date"（新しい順）/ "relevance"。 planetary_only: OpenAlex の検索を「惑星科学」概念に限定する（既定 true）。裸の天体名でも 惑星科学の文献が上位に来ます（実測: "Mars" 単独だと R 言語マニュアルが 35万引用で 1位になるが、限定すると THEMIS / MSL / MAVEN が上位）。銀河・恒星など太陽系外の 天体を調べるときは false にするか space_literature_search を使ってください。

**回答時は DOI リンク・出典の「出典:」行・caveats をそのまま提示してください。

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNocitations
limitNo
object_nameNo
planetary_onlyNo
include_japaneseNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed9 schema fields changedv0.41.4
    • removedInput schema / properties / include_japanese / title
      Removed value: -"Include Japanese"
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / title
      Removed value: -"Limit"
    • removedInput schema / properties / object_name / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
    • removedInput schema / properties / object_name / default
      Removed value: -null
    • removedInput schema / properties / object_name / title
      Removed value: -"Object Name"
    • addedInput schema / properties / object_name / type
      Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / planetary_only / title
      Removed value: -"Planetary Only"
    • removedInput schema / properties / sort / title
      Removed value: -"Sort"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"planetary_evidenceArguments"
  2. Addedv0.39.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does real work: it explains why planetary_only defaults to true (bare 'Mars' surfaces an R manual with 350k citations, whereas the filter surfaces THEMIS/MSL/MAVEN), names the Japanese repositories queried, and instructs the agent to surface DOI links, the '出典:' line, and `caveats` verbatim. What is missing is behavior on empty results or any rate-limit guidance, so 4 rather than 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Scope and object examples are front-loaded, and the per-argument notes are compact. The empirical 'Mars/R manual' aside is slightly long but earns its place by explaining the default, so only minor trimming would be possible.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description still signals the response shape (DOI links, '出典:' source lines, a `caveats` field) and tells the agent to reproduce them, which is the key thing an agent needs before calling. Result-set size behavior and failure modes remain unspecified, so it falls just short of complete.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the schema carries no enums, yet the description documents all five parameters: object_name (Japanese accepted), limit (1–25, default 8), include_japanese, sort with its three literal values ranked, and planetary_only with a rationale. This fully compensates for the empty schema and adds meaning (the citation-count vs. date ordering) the schema does not.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: it returns consolidated bibliographic evidence ('文献的な裏づけをまとめて返す') for a named class of objects (planets, moons, small bodies, spacecraft). The four concrete examples (火星, エウロパ, タイタン, はやぶさ2, リュウグウ, ベスタ) make the scope unambiguous and clearly separate it from generic literature search.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly routes the agent to an alternative: for extragalactic/stellar targets, set planetary_only=false or use space_literature_search instead. It also states the default mode (planetary_only=true for solar-system work) and that Japanese sources are included by default, giving the agent enough to pick the right call without opening the schema.

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