VesselAPI MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_vessel_casualties

Retrieve marine casualty records for a specific vessel by IMO or MMSI number to review incident history and safety data.

Instructions

Get marine casualty records for a vessel

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": {
      "vesselId": "<vesselId>"
    },
    "name": "get_vessel_casualties"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Results per page, 1 to 50. Defaults to 20.
`idType`	No	Identifier type: imo (default) or mmsi
`vesselId`	Yes	Vessel identifier (IMO number by default)
`nextToken`	No	Pagination token from previous response

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv2.2.0Oct 30, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

Changed6 schema fields changedv2.0.0Aug 20, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / idType / description

Previous value: -"Identifier type: imo (default), mmsi, or vesselId"New value: +"Identifier type: imo (default) or mmsi"

addedInput schema / properties / idType / enum
```
Added value: +[
+  "imo",
+  "mmsi"
+]
```

changedInput schema / properties / limit / description

Previous value: -"Max results per page"New value: +"Results per page, 1 to 50. Defaults to 20."

addedInput schema / properties / limit / maximum
```
Added value: +50
```
addedInput schema / properties / limit / minimum
```
Added value: +1
```

changedInput schema / properties / limit / type

Previous value: -"number"New value: +"integer"

Addedv1.3.0May 6, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says nothing about what a 'marine casualty record' contains (injuries, fatalities, pollution, damage), whether history is bounded, that results are paginated, or what an empty result means for a vessel with no casualties.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler, but it is terse to the point of under-informing rather than deliberately economical.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should say more about what is returned and how pagination behaves. The parameter schema compensates on inputs, but the agent still lacks enough information to interpret results confidently.

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 100%, including enum values for idType and bounds for limit, so the schema already does the heavy lifting. The description adds no extra meaning such as identifier format expectations or how nextToken interacts with limit, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb+resource pair ('Get marine casualty records') scoped to a vessel, which is unambiguous and unlike any sibling tool (positions, emissions, ports, ETAs). It does not explicitly state how it differs from siblings, but the unique resource makes the distinction obvious.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, no prerequisites, and no named alternatives. The only routing signal is the implied one that you need a vessel identifier.

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