weather_current_global
Current weather for any global coordinate.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lat | Yes | ||
| lon | Yes | ||
| variables | No |
Current weather for any global coordinate.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lat | Yes | ||
| lon | Yes | ||
| variables | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description only states the basic purpose with no behavioral details beyond what annotations provide (which are empty). No mention of data sources, update frequency, or any limitations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose with no redundant information. Every word is necessary.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the lack of output schema, zero parameter descriptions, and empty annotations, the tool is underspecified. The minimal description does not adequately prepare an agent to use the tool correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has 0% description coverage for its three parameters. The description adds no meaning to lat, lon, or variables, leaving the agent to infer all parameter semantics from type alone.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Current weather for any global coordinate.' clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes from siblings like weather_alerts and weather_forecast_grid by focusing on current weather at a point.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Despite numerous sibling tools (e.g., weather_alerts, weather_forecast_grid), the description provides no contextual hints for selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Tools cover very diverse domains (weather, FDA, legal, crypto, etc.), so cross-domain confusion is low. However, within domains there is notable overlap: multiple food recall tools (food_recall_check, food_safety), multiple weather tools (weather_current_global, weather_forecast_grid, weather_alerts, weather_bias), and several Polymarket-related tools. This can cause agent misselection.
Naming is inconsistent: some tools use verb_noun (search_arxiv, scrape, validate_agent_manifest), others use noun phrases (smart_money, space_weather, tide_data), and some are long descriptive phrases (cross_platform_arb_scan, polymarket_event_scan). No single pattern is followed, making predictions difficult.
95 tools is excessively high for any coherent purpose. The server appears to be a random aggregation of APIs with no clear scope. Such a large catalog overwhelms agents and dilutes utility; most tools could be split into specialized servers.
Although many domains are touched, each is covered only shallowly. For example, weather lacks historical data, legal lacks case details beyond court opinions, and financial lacks stock prices. There are obvious gaps like no user authentication or data persistence. The tool set feels like a collection of endpoints rather than a cohesive service.