SnowSure — Snow & Ski

Compare forecast models

compare_forecasts

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare snow forecasts across 7 weather models (ECMWF, GFS, GEM, JMA, ICON, Météo-France, Met Norway) for a resort. Shows model agreement and uncertainty. Use for forecast reliability queries. The model table and days 8–14 need SnowSure Pro, or a resort in My Mountains when signed in; otherwise this returns the seven-day blend alone.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	No	Resort slug or name, e.g. "portillo" or "Portillo". Required unless `resort` is given.
`resort`	No	Same as `slug`: the resort slug or name. Pass either one.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`markdown`	No	Human-readable markdown summary of the tool result (may be omitted when structuredContent carries a typed payload; content[0].text always has the prose).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 16, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / resort

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Same as `slug`: the resort slug or name. Pass either one.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / slug / description

Previous value: -"Resort slug to compare forecasts for"New value: +"Resort slug or name, e.g. \"portillo\" or \"Portillo\". Required unless `resort` is given."

removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "slug"
-]
```

Changed2 schema fields changedJul 2, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / markdown / description

Previous value: -"Human-readable markdown summary of the tool result."New value: +"Human-readable markdown summary of the tool result (may be omitted when structuredContent carries a typed payload; content[0].text always has the prose)."

removedOutput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "markdown"
-]
```

First observedJun 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this a safe, idempotent, non-destructive read. The description adds material context the annotations cannot: the model table and days 8–14 are gated behind SnowSure Pro or a saved resort, and unauthenticated/free callers receive only the seven-day blend. That tier-gating disclosure is genuinely useful.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core comparison purpose before the usage note and gating caveat. The model-name enumeration is slightly verbose but arguably earns its place by telling the agent what a differentiator this is.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. Between the purpose, the reliability-query usage cue, and the tier-gating caveat, the definition gives an agent what it needs; only explicit fallback routing is missing.

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% and the schema already explains slug/resort and that either may be passed. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Compare) and resource (snow forecasts across 7 named models) for a resort, plus what it surfaces (model agreement and uncertainty). This distinguishes it clearly from the single-source sibling get_weather_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?

"Use for forecast reliability queries" gives a clear qualifying condition, and the Pro/My Mountains gating tells the agent when the fuller output is available. It stops short of explicitly naming an alternative like get_weather_forecast as the fallback.

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

All SnowSure — Snow & Ski tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?