space-finder-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

sky_map_with_satellites

Generate a ground-view sky map for any location and time, showing stars, planets, the Milky Way, and satellites to see what's visible overhead.

Instructions

東京（または指定地）の空を地上から見上げた図（恒星・惑星・天の川・人工衛星）を返す。

例:「東京の空に惑星と人工衛星を重ねた図」「今見えるISSを星空マップで」「木星はどこに見える？」

Args: place: 観測地（例 "東京","大阪","new york"）。lat/lon 指定時は無視。省略時は東京。 lat: 観測地の緯度。lon と併用時は place より優先。 lon: 観測地の経度。 when: 観測時刻 ISO8601（例 "2026-09-09T11:00:00Z"）。省略時は現在時刻。 engine: 廃止（互換のため残置）。旧 "ground"/"simple"/"accurate" の3エンジンは地上視点パノラマ（ground_view）へ統合した。どの値を渡しても同じ描画になる（旧 simple/accurate の見た目の要素は ground に取り込み済み）。 span: 横方向の視野（度, 30〜360）。360 で全天。 az0: 左端の方位（度）。span=180, az0=225 なら南西→北東。 lp: 光害の程度 "city"（都心）/ "suburb"（郊外, 既定）/ "dark"（山間・離島）。未対応の値は既定（郊外）に落とし、その旨を本文に明示する。 show: 依頼表示する天体名（カンマ区切り。例 "木星,ベガ,M31"）。省略時は主要天体すべて。

回答時はこのリンクをそのまま提示してください（画像が描画されない環境では唯一の導線）。

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`lp`	No	suburb
`az0`	No
`lat`	No
`lon`	No
`show`	No
`span`	No
`when`	No
`place`	No
`engine`	No	ground

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed15 schema fields changedv0.41.4Oct 23, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / az0 / title
```
Removed value: -"Az0"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / engine / title
```
Removed value: -"engine"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / lat / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedInput schema / properties / lat / title
```
Removed value: -"lat"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / lon / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedInput schema / properties / lon / title
```
Removed value: -"lon"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / lp / title
```
Removed value: -"lp"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / place / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedInput schema / properties / place / title
```
Removed value: -"place"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / show / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedInput schema / properties / show / title
```
Removed value: -"show"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / span / title
```
Removed value: -"Span"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / when / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedInput schema / properties / when / title
```
Removed value: -"when"
```
- removedInput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"sky_map_with_satellitesArguments"
```

Changed5 schema fields changedv0.39.0Oct 12, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / az0

Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "title": "Az0",
+  "type": "number"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / engine / default
```
Previous value: -"simple"New value: +"ground"
```

addedInput schema / properties / lp

Added value: +{
+  "default": "suburb",
+  "title": "lp",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / show

Added value: +{
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "show",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / span

Added value: +{
+  "default": 360,
+  "title": "Span",
+  "type": "number"
+}

Addedv0.25.2Sep 12, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers: it discloses that engine is deprecated and any value yields the same ground_view rendering, that unsupported lp values silently fall back to suburb with that fact surfaced in the prose output, and that the returned link must be presented verbatim because it is the only path when images don't render. Missing only auth/rate-limit or output-format detail to reach 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?

The purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, followed by compact examples and an Args block that maps one-to-one onto the parameters. The engine paragraph is longer than strictly necessary but the deprecation caveat justifies the space. No filler sentences.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description still explains that a diagram plus a link is returned and how to relay that link, which is the essential return-value context. It does not specify image format or whether the link expires, a minor gap for a 9-parameter rendering 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%, yet the description documents all 9 parameters with meaning beyond the schema: precedence rules (lat/lon override place), span in degrees 30–360 with 360 = full sky, az0 semantics explained via the span=180/az0=225 example, lp's three named levels plus fallback behavior, and when's ISO8601 format. This fully compensates for the empty schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a concrete verb and resource: it returns a ground-view sky diagram containing stars, planets, the Milky Way, and artificial satellites, with location-aware framing. This clearly separates it from siblings like moon_phase_map or constellation_now. It stops short of naming an explicit alternative, so it is not a full 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The examples ("東京の空に惑星と人工衛星を重ねた図", "今見えるISSを星空マップで") imply the kinds of requests this tool answers, giving usable context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no sibling alternatives (e.g., iss_now, sat_ground_track) are named, leaving routing to inference.

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

Deploy Server

sky_map_with_satellites

Instructions

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Other Tools