Skip to main content
Glama

Adsb

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Recent Changes

recent_changes
Read-onlyIdempotent

"What's new with X" / "latest on Y" / "what happened to Z this week / month / quarter" / "updates on Acme" / "news on Tesla recently" / "what's happening with Apple" — change feed for a company in the last N days/weeks/months in ONE parallel call. Fans out to SEC EDGAR (filings since since), GDELT→GNews fallback (news mentions in window — GDELT preferred, GNews when rate-limited or 5xx), USPTO (patents granted; PatentsView API sunset May 2025 so this soft-fails until reactivated). since accepts ISO date ("2026-04-01") or relative shorthand ("7d", "30d", "3m", "1y"). Returns structured changes[] grouped by source + total_changes count + pipeworx:// citation URIs. Use entity_profile instead when you want the static profile (filings + fundamentals + LEI + patents) regardless of window.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesEntity type. Only "company" supported today.
sinceYesWindow start — ISO date ("2026-04-01") or relative ("7d", "30d", "3m", "1y"). Use "30d" or "1m" for typical monitoring.
valueYesTicker (e.g., "AAPL") or zero-padded CIK (e.g., "0000320193").

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds rich behavioral details: fans out to three sources (SEC EDGAR, GDELT→GNews fallback, USPTO with known API sunset), explains fallback logic, soft-fail for patents, and parameter behavior (ISO date vs relative shorthand). No contradictions.

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 description is sufficiently concise for the complexity; it front-loads example queries and then provides technical details. A slightly more structured layout could improve scannability, but overall efficient.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Despite no output schema, the description mentions return structure (changes[] grouped by source, total_changes count, pipeworx:// citations) and covers multi-source fallback behavior, making it complete for agent understanding.

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 100%, but the description adds significant value: explains `since` format with examples ("2026-04-01", "7d", "30d", "3m", "1y") and clarifies `value` accepts ticker or zero-padded CIK, which enhances usability beyond the schema descriptions.

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 explicitly states the tool provides a change feed for a company (SEC, news, patents) over a time window, with clear examples like "What's new with X" and specifically distinguishes from the sibling tool entity_profile.

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 description gives clear when-to-use examples (e.g., "latest on Y", "updates on Acme") and explicitly recommends entity_profile for static profiles, but does not enumerate other exclusions.

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

All Adsb toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several clusters of tools have unclear boundaries: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, validate_claim, and bet_research all overlap as query/research entry points, and ai_visibility_check vs. scan_competitor_ai_presence plus the six polymarket_* tools create further confusion. An agent would often need deep description reading to pick the right tool.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming mixes consistent verb_noun forms (get_aircraft, resolve_entity, validate_claim) with noun phrases (aircraft_near, military_aircraft, recent_alerts), adjective-led names (polymarket_arbitrage), and conversational names (ask_pipeworx, suggest_questions). Subgroups like polymarket_* are internally consistent, but overall there is no unified pattern.

Tool Count2/5

35 tools is high for any cohesive server, especially one named 'Adsb' where only 4 tools relate to aircraft tracking. The count is inflated by many overlapping meta-research, prediction-market, memory, and subscription tools, making it feel like several servers were merged into one.

Completeness2/5

For the implied 'Adsb' domain, only live ADSB positioning is covered; airport info, flight schedules, route search, and aviation weather are missing. Even as a general data/betting server, there are gaps like a direct stock-quote tool and unclear lifecycle coverage across the mixed feature set, so agents will likely hit dead ends.

Resources