SnowSure — Snow & Ski

Search resorts

search_resorts

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search for ski resorts by name, country, or region. Returns matching resorts with basic conditions. Use for "find resorts in [location]" or "search [name]" queries.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum results to return (default: 20)
`query`	No	Search query - can be resort name, country, or partial match
`country`	No	Filter by exact country name (e.g., "Japan", "Switzerland", "United States")

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

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The description states 'Returns matching resorts with basic conditions,' which adds minimal behavioral context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false). The annotations already convey safety, so the description is adequate but not rich in behavioral disclosure.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose, second provides usage guidance. No extraneous words. Information is front-loaded and efficient.

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 presence of an output schema and thorough annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral and usage aspects. The tool's purpose, parameters, and query patterns are clearly explained, leaving no gaps for an agent to misinterpret.

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?

All three parameters (limit, query, country) are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds no new semantic information beyond what the schema already provides, such as default values or exact formats. Baseline score 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('ski resorts') and provides example queries ('find resorts in [location]' or 'search [name]'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like compare_resorts, get_resort, or find_resorts_by_criteria.

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?

The description gives explicit usage patterns ('Use for...') which helps the agent know when to invoke this tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives like get_resort for detailed info, leaving some ambiguity.

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?