Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
space-finder-mcp

space-finder-mcp

by loosephoto
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

search_space_images

Search NASA's Image & Video Library for planet, satellite, and space mission images, then display selected results inline in chat.

Instructions

惑星・人工衛星・宇宙ミッションの画像を NASA Image & Video Library から検索し表示する。

例: 「火星の画像を見せて」「ハッブルの写真」「アポロの画像」

Args: query: 検索語（mars, jupiter, hubble, apollo など英語が確実）。 limit: 返す画像件数（既定 3、最大 10）。 show_inline: 画像をチャットにインライン表示するか（既定 True）。 inline_max: チャットに埋め込む画像の枚数（既定 1、最大 5）。 転送量を抑えるため既定は先頭1枚のみ。全件のURLは structuredContent.results[].image_url に入る。

回答時はこのリンクをそのまま提示してください。

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
queryYes
inline_maxNo
show_inlineNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv0.41.4
    • removedInput schema / properties / inline_max / title
      Removed value: -"Inline Max"
    • removedInput schema / properties / limit / title
      Removed value: -"Limit"
    • removedInput schema / properties / query / title
      Removed value: -"Query"
    • removedInput schema / properties / show_inline / title
      Removed value: -"Show Inline"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"search_space_imagesArguments"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.25.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / inline_max
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 1,
+  "title": "Inline Max",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  3. 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, the description still carries the burden well: it discloses defaults (limit 3, inline_max 1), caps (10 and 5), the transfer-volume rationale for inlining only the first image, and that full URLs land in structuredContent.results[].image_url. It does not cover failure modes, empty-result behavior, or the public/no-auth nature of the NASA library.

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?

Front-loaded purpose sentence, then examples, then a compact Args block with per-parameter notes; every line carries information. A closing instruction about presenting the link is somewhat loosely worded but not wasteful.

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, and the description compensates by naming the result field where image URLs appear; with four parameters fully documented, an agent can call it correctly. Missing only edge-case behavior such as no-result handling.

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%, yet all four parameters are explained in the description, including defaults, maximum values, the practical meaning of show_inline vs inline_max, and the important hint that English query terms are more reliable.

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?

States a specific verb (search and display images), the exact resource (planets, moons, missions) and the source (NASA Image & Video Library), which cleanly separates it from the sibling search_space_videos and search_space_audio 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 example utterances (「火星の画像を見せて」etc.) make the intended invocation context concrete, but it never names an alternative tool or states when not to use this one, so there is no explicit routing guidance.

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