SnowSure — Snow & Ski

Lift-operation risk

get_operating_risk

Read-onlyIdempotent

Will the lifts run? A 48-hour operating-risk estimate from the Open-Meteo forecast — wind-hold (gusts), visibility, cold (wind-chill), and heavy-snow control delays. Modeled guidance, NOT the resort's own operating decision — always check live lift status.

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"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"
-]
```

AddedJun 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value beyond those: the 48-hour validity window, the Open-Meteo data source, and the critical epistemic caveat that this is modeled guidance, not the resort's authoritative decision. No contradiction with 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?

Three sentences with zero waste, front-loaded with the hook question 'Will the lifts run?' Each sentence earns its place: the estimate scope, the risk factors, and the cautionary caveat. Efficient and well-ordered.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering the safety profile, the description covers all essential semantics: time window, included factors, data source, and authority caveat. Minor omissions like forecast update cadence or when the 48-hour window starts don't hinder correct invocation.

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 `resort` are fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter-level detail, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Will the lifts run?' / '48-hour operating-risk estimate') and enumerates the concrete risk factors (wind-hold gusts, visibility, wind-chill, heavy-snow). This specificity clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_weather_forecast and get_avalanche without opening their schemas.

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?

Gives clear usage context — a 48-hour modeled estimate — plus an explicit when-not: 'NOT the resort's own operating decision — always check live lift status.' It steers the agent toward live-status verification but never names a specific sibling alternative, so it stops short of fully explicit routing.

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?