Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
io.github.qso-graph/ionis-mcp

io.github.qso-graph/ionis-mcp

by qso-graph
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Solar Correlation

solar_correlation
Read-onlyIdempotent

Analyze how solar flux (SFI) affects propagation on a chosen HF band by grouping signal reports into SFI brackets with spot counts, average SNR, and reliability.

Instructions

How does solar flux (SFI) affect propagation on a specific band?

Groups signatures by SFI bracket and shows spot counts, average SNR, and reliability for each bracket. Higher SFI generally helps HF bands above 30m (F-layer ionization) but hurts bands below 30m (D-layer absorption).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "band": "<band>"
    },
    "name": "solar_correlation"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bandYesADIF band ID (102-111)
sourceNoDataset source (default: "wspr")wspr
rx_gridNoOptional RX grid to filter (omit for global)
tx_gridNoOptional TX grid to filter (omit for global)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.9

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish the safe read-only, idempotent profile, so the description is free to spend its words on behavior that matters: exactly what is grouped, which aggregates are returned, and how to read them (higher SFI helps >30m, hurts <30m). It stops short of scope details like time window or sample-size requirements used for bracketing.

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 leading question front-loads the purpose, followed by one sentence for mechanics and one for interpretation. No line is filler; the domain caveat earns its place because it prevents misreading the brackets.

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 an output schema present, the description needn't describe return values, and full schema coverage plus rich annotations cover most remaining needs. What is missing is scoping context — dataset/time range and whether bands with sparse data are shown.

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 coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented and the baseline applies. The description references 'a specific band' but adds nothing about the ADIF band ID encoding (102-111) or how rx_grid/tx_grid restrict the correlation, leaving the cryptic band ID unexplained in both places.

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 names the specific analysis performed: grouping signatures by SFI bracket and returning spot counts, average SNR, and reliability per bracket. That is concrete enough to separate it from siblings like solar_history (time series) or band_summary, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'How does solar flux affect propagation on a specific band?' signals the question this tool answers, and the F-layer/D-layer note hints at when the result is meaningful. There is no explicit 'use this instead of X when Y' routing, which matters given 11 siblings.

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