SnowSure — Snow & Ski

El Niño resort signal

get_elnino_signal

Read-onlyIdempotent

Resort-level El Niño / ENSO outlook from SnowSure's 30-year fleet dataset (559 ranked resorts). Returns rank, tier, strong/all-event signal, analog winters ('97-98, '15-16, '23-24), forecast paragraph, methodology note, and in-season scorecard when live. Use for ANY El Niño, ENSO, or 2026-27 winter-outlook question about a named resort. A pattern, not a promise — n=3 disclosed; D/E tiers are timing plays. For a Southern Hemisphere resort whose 2026 season has closed, also returns the season result (predicted vs measured, at the summit, modelled by ERA5, with its updated date).

Input 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

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, e.g. \"alta\", \"portillo\", \"niseko-grand-hirafu\""New value: +"Resort slug or name, e.g. \"portillo\" or \"Portillo\". Required unless `resort` is given."

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

AddedAug 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, but the description adds substantial context beyond them: n=3 disclosure, the 'pattern, not a promise' caveat, D/E tier timing interpretation, and the special Southern Hemisphere season-result behavior. These are meaningful behavioral and interpretive details that help an agent use the output correctly.

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 front-loaded with purpose and return contents, followed by usage and caveats. It is dense but mostly earns its space; the main length comes from useful caveats rather than repetition. It could be slightly tighter, but it is well structured.

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?

Given the output schema and rich annotations, the description supplies the remaining context an agent needs: what is returned, when to use it, limitations of the signal, and the special Southern Hemisphere season-result case. Nothing critical for calling or interpreting the tool 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains `slug` and `resort` as interchangeable resort identifiers. The description does not add parameter-specific syntax or constraints beyond the schema. This is an appropriate baseline 3 when the schema carries the parameter documentation.

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 names a specific resource and scope: resort-level El Niño/ENSO outlook from a 30-year fleet dataset, and it explicitly frames the tool around a named resort. This distinguishes it from the rankings-style sibling `get_elnino_rankings` without needing to inspect either schema.

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?

It gives clear usage guidance: use for ANY El Niño, ENSO, or 2026-27 winter-outlook question about a named resort. It also explains the Southern Hemisphere closed-season case. However, it does not explicitly name `get_elnino_rankings` as the alternative for non-resort or ranking-level questions.

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?