Skip to main content
Glama

TensorFeed

by ai.tensorfeed

get_weather_alerts

Get active US weather alerts from the National Weather Service. US-only coverage. Filter by 2-letter state code (area), exact event name (e.g. 'Tornado Warning', 'Heat Advisory'), severity (Extreme | Severe | Moderate | Minor | Unknown), urgency (Immediate | Expected | Future | Past | Unknown), and status (actual | exercise | system | test | draft). Returns a flattened alerts list with id, event, severity, urgency, headline, description, areaDesc, sent/effective/expires/ends, sender_name, web URL. Refreshed in real time upstream; cached 60s. License: US Government public domain (17 USC §105).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
areaNo2-letter US state or territory code (CA, TX, PR, etc). Optional.
eventNoExact NWS event name (e.g. "Tornado Warning", "Heat Advisory"). Optional.
limitNoMax alerts to return (1-500). Default 50.
statusNoOne of: actual, exercise, system, test, draft. Optional.
urgencyNoOne of: Immediate, Expected, Future, Past, Unknown. Optional.
severityNoOne of: Extreme, Severe, Moderate, Minor, Unknown. Optional.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It discloses real-time refresh, 60-second caching, public domain license, and the returned fields. It does not mention authentication or rate limits, but for a read-only public API this is sufficient.

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?

The description is a single, well-structured paragraph that efficiently conveys purpose, filters, return fields, caching behavior, and license. Every sentence adds value; no redundancy.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description lists return fields. All 6 parameters are explained. Caching and licensing are noted. For a read-only query tool, the description provides sufficient context for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and each parameter is described in the schema. The description adds value by enumerating accepted values for severity, urgency, and status, and clarifies the event parameter expects exact NWS event names. This provides context beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool returns active US weather alerts from the National Weather Service, specifying the resource (weather alerts) and the source (NWS). The description distinguishes it from sibling tools because no other sibling focuses on weather alerts.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lists filters but lacks context on selection criteria or exclusions. No alternatives are mentioned.

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

All TensorFeed toolsInspect
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
Disambiguation3/5

Several security/vulnerability tools (check_ai_supply_chain_risk, get_cve_record, get_osv_advisory_by_id, get_osv_advisory_for_package) have overlapping purposes, making it potentially confusing to choose the right one. Other tools are more distinct, but the ambiguity in this cluster lowers the score.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are snake_case and mostly follow a verb_noun pattern, but the verbs are inconsistent (check, get, list, lookup, query, register, route, search, submit, whats_new). Some tools use 'get' while others use 'check' for similar retrieval actions, and 'whats_new' does not fit the verb_noun pattern.

Tool Count2/5

With 27 tools, the count exceeds the 25 threshold for 'too many', even though the broad scope spans many domains. The sheer number makes the server feel heavy and harder to navigate.

Completeness3/5

The server covers a wide range of data domains, but notable gaps exist: no management of watch subscriptions (only register), no CVE search, and no model search. Write operations are minimal, leaving some workflows incomplete.

Resources