SnowSure — Snow & Ski

Destination hub

get_destination

Read-onlyIdempotent

Multi-mountain destination hub (Niseko, Chamonix, Aspen Snowmass umbrella) with a table of member ski areas. Use ONLY when the user names the hub itself — NOT for photo gallery (→ get_resort_photos on a specific mountain slug) and NOT for resort guide cards (→ get_resort_info).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes	Destination slug (e.g. niseko, chamonix, hakuba, aspen-snowmass) or alias like "hakuba valley"
`limit`	No	Max member resorts to return (default 12)

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).

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true; the description adds that it returns 'a table of member ski areas', giving behavioral context beyond the schema/annotations. 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with zero waste. The first sentence states purpose and examples; the second provides usage guidelines with alternatives. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values need not be explained. The description covers purpose, usage constraints, and sibling differentiation. Complete for a read-only list tool.

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% (both slug and limit have descriptions). The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 starts with 'Multi-mountain destination hub' and explicitly lists example hubs, clearly stating the tool's verb (get) and resource (destination hub). It distinguishes from siblings 'get_resort_photos' and 'get_resort_info' by naming exact conditions.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description tells exactly when to use: 'Use ONLY when the user names the hub itself'. It provides explicit when-not and alternatives: 'NOT for photo gallery (→ get_resort_photos on a specific mountain slug) and NOT for resort guide cards (→ get_resort_info)'.

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

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

Multiple tool clusters have unclear boundaries: get_resort overlaps with get_resort_info and get_resort_photos, ask_snowdata competes with compare_resorts and the El Niño tools, and get_snow_history / get_season_leaderboard / get_insights cover similar retrospective ground. The descriptions try hard to route agents, but with 45 tools an agent will frequently have to choose between near-equivalent options.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a clear verb_noun snake_case pattern: get_resort_info, compare_resorts, find_best_powder, book_lodging, save_resort. Minor deviations like ask_snowdata and the very similar get_resort vs get_resort_info names prevent a 5, but overall the naming convention is predictable.

Tool Count2/5

45 tools is well above the 25+ threshold and puts a heavy selection burden on the agent. While the domain is broad, many tools are narrow variations on conditions, history, road data, or trip planning that could be consolidated or exposed as configurable parameters.

Completeness4/5

The toolkit covers an impressively wide lifecycle: resort discovery, photos, live conditions, forecasts, history, comparisons, passes, flights, lodging, road status, alerts, and user saved resorts. Minor gaps exist such as no lift-ticket booking, no lesson/rental booking, and flight search only produces links rather than a booking flow, but agents can generally complete core snow-trip workflows.

Resources

Need Help?