Skip to main content
Glama

Nws

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Get Stations

get_stations
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find NWS weather observation stations in a US state (e.g., "CA", "NY", "TX"). Returns station IDs (use with get_observation), names, time zones, and coordinates. US only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum stations to return (1-500, default 20).
stateYesTwo-letter US state code (e.g. "CA", "NY").

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYesNumber of weather stations returned
stateYesTwo-letter US state code
stationsYes

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. Description adds specific return fields (station IDs, names, time zones, coordinates) and geographic scope, which provides useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose with examples, second lists return fields and guidance. Front-loaded, no wasted words.

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?

For a simple lookup tool with full schema and output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, return data, usage hint, and geographic limitation.

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 schema already describes both parameters (limit, state). Description reinforces state usage via examples but does not add new semantic details beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Find' and resource 'NWS weather observation stations' with specific scope (US state). Includes examples and return fields, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_observation and get_forecast.

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?

Explicitly mentions 'use with get_observation' for workflow context and 'US only' as a constraint. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but the purpose is clear enough for agent selection.

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

All Nws 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have overlapping purposes, e.g., multiple Polymarket analysis tools, several query tools (ask_pipeworx, deep_research, compare_entities, entity_profile) with unclear boundaries. Agents may struggle to choose the correct tool.

Naming Consistency3/5

While most names use snake_case, there is no consistent prefix pattern across subdomains (e.g., 'ask_', 'get_', 'polymarket_', 'pipeworx_'). Some names like 'bet_research' and 'deep_research' follow different conventions within the same domain.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is excessive for a server named 'Nws' that primarily suggests weather. The set covers many unrelated domains (prediction markets, npm scanning, memory), making the scope unfocused and overloaded.

Completeness3/5

The server has decent coverage for prediction markets and company financials, but weather tools are limited to basic forecasts/alerts, lacking radar, climate, or historical data. Other domains like npm scanning seem tacked on.

Resources