Skip to main content
Glama
loosephoto

space-finder-mcp

by loosephoto
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

search_space_audio

Search space audio by keyword and get playable URLs for short sound effects or long podcasts, such as planet sounds, launches, or astronaut interviews.

Instructions

宇宙関連の音声を検索し、再生可能な音声URLを返す。

content には表示用サマリ、structuredContent にはJSON（タイトル/再生URL/種別/尺など）を返す。

「宇宙の音・惑星の音・打ち上げの効果音」のような短い音声を探すなら kind="sound_effect"、
「ポッドキャスト・解説・飛行士インタビュー」のような長い音声なら kind="podcast" を指定。
既定 kind="auto" は両方を探す。

例:
  - 「スプートニクの音を聞きたい」→ query="sputnik", kind="sound_effect"
  - 「アポロのポッドキャスト」→ query="apollo", kind="podcast"
  - 「火星の音」→ query="mars", kind="auto"

Args:
    query: 検索語（juno, saturn, sputnik, launch, apollo など）。
    limit: 返す件数（既定 3、最大 10）。
    kind: "auto"(両方) / "podcast"(NASA Image Library の長尺トーク・解説) /
          "sound_effect"(短い宇宙の音・効果音)。

content の各項目には、メディア本体より前に「🖼️ [画像を開く: タイトル](URL)」
「🎧 [音声を開く: タイトル](URL)」「🎬 [動画を再生: タイトル](URL)」というアイコン付き
リンクを出します（インライン表示を描画できない CLI/Android 系ハーネスでも開けるように）。
回答時はこのリンクをそのまま提示してください。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNoauto
limitNo
queryYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does disclose behavior beyond structured data: it explains that content returns a display summary while structuredContent returns JSON with title/play-URL/type/duration, and it specifies how result links are rendered for non-inline harnesses. Auth requirements, rate limits, and failure/empty-result behavior are still unstated, which keeps it out of the top band.

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?

The purpose and return shape are front-loaded, and the parameter guidance is grouped under an explicit Args section. It is longer than strictly necessary because the icon-link formatting instruction and the three examples partially restate the kind guidance, but every block remains actionable.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description correctly takes on the job of explaining return values (content summary plus structuredContent fields) and the link format. What is missing is guidance on empty or failed searches and on upstream source coverage, which would matter for an agent deciding whether a miss means 'no results' or 'wrong tool'.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: query is illustrated with concrete example terms, limit is documented as default 3 / max 10 (a bound absent from the schema), and kind's three accepted values and their meanings are spelled out despite no enum being defined.

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 opening sentence states a specific verb (検索) and resource (宇宙関連の音声) plus the concrete output (再生可能な音声URL). This clearly separates it from siblings such as search_space_images and search_space_videos, which cover other media types.

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 concrete routing rules for the internal modes — kind="sound_effect" for short sounds, kind="podcast" for long talks, and kind="auto" to search both — reinforced by three worked examples. It does not, however, say when to prefer this tool over sibling media search tools, so it stops short of full alternative coverage.

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