Skip to main content
Glama
noodlemctwoodle

uk-drone-airspace-mcp

by noodlemctwoodle
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Check NOTAMs at a location

check_notams
Read-only

Check temporary UK airspace restrictions (NOTAMs) covering a point, radius, or date. Returns each NOTAM's validity, radius, and full text sorted by distance.

Instructions

Check temporary airspace restrictions (NOTAMs) from the NATS UK pre-flight bulletin that cover a point, optionally within a radius and on a given date. Returns each NOTAM with validity, radius and full text, sorted by distance. NOTAMs without usable coordinates are listed separately so nothing is silently dropped. Informational only; not a substitute for an official NATS pre-flight briefing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latNoLatitude in decimal degrees (WGS84).
lonNoLongitude in decimal degrees (WGS84), negative west of Greenwich.
dateNoISO 8601 date or date-time (UTC assumed when no offset). Defaults to now.
placeNoPlace name, postcode or landmark in the UK, e.g. "Tyndale Monument", "BS1 6QF", "Durdle Door". Use lat/lon instead if you already have coordinates.
formatNotext for a readable report (default), json for structured output, brief for two or three spoken-friendly sentences (use in voice conversations).text
radius_kmNoAlso list NOTAMs whose circle comes within this many km of the point. 0 = only NOTAMs covering the point.
max_resultsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / format / description
      Previous value: -"text for a readable report (default), json for structured output."New value: +"text for a readable report (default), json for structured output, brief for two or three spoken-friendly sentences (use in voice conversations)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / format / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "text",
-  "json"
-]New value: +[
+  "text",
+  "json",
+  "brief"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds meaningful behavior: it states the tool is informational, not a substitute for official briefings, and that NOTAMs without usable coordinates are listed separately to avoid silently dropping them. This goes beyond the annotations and gives the agent a clearer sense of the tool's limitations and output handling.

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 concise (four sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by key output details and a disclaimer. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or filler, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

Given the tool has 7 parameters, no required ones, and no output schema, the description does a good job covering the main output aspects: it lists return fields (validity, radius, full text), explains sorting, handles coordinate-less NOTAMs, and describes the format parameter options. It does not mention the max_results default or pagination, but these are minor gaps and the description is adequate for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 86%, which is high, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds a little context, such as 'optionally within a radius and on a given date' mapping to radius_km and date, and explains the output is sorted by distance. However, it does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('temporary airspace restrictions (NOTAMs) from the NATS UK pre-flight bulletin'), with clear scope: covering a point, optionally within a radius and on a given date. It also specifies output characteristics (sorted by distance, coordinate-less NOTAMs listed separately), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like check_route or check_location without needing to open their schemas.

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 description gives context that it is informational and not a substitute for an official NATS pre-flight briefing, which implies a limitation but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like preflight_briefing or check_route. It lacks explicit exclusions or comparative guidance, so an agent must infer the appropriate context.

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