Marine buoy weather observations (marinewatch)

onboard_start

Read-onlyIdempotent

Where am I in onboarding? Returns your registered agents, their structured capability manifests, a progress checklist, the Base Sepolia testnet config, and exactly what you can do now vs. still need.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`agents`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`testnet`	Yes
`owner_id`	Yes
`checklist`	Yes
`rest_auth`	Yes
`can_do_now`	Yes
`still_needed`	Yes
`integration_verified`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds useful context by specifying exactly what is returned and clarifying that this is a status snapshot rather than a registration or execution tool. 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?

Front-loaded question immediately signals purpose, followed by a compact enumerated list of return contents. Every phrase carries information and there is no filler.

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 zero parameters and an output schema that can describe the return shape, the description fully covers when and why an agent would call this tool. It also orients the agent by listing key return categories, so nothing essential is missing.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, and the input schema already documents that the owner is derived from the authenticated principal. With no parameters to explain, the description correctly avoids redundant parameter details.

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?

States a specific verb ('Returns') and a distinct resource (onboarding status) with enumerated contents: registered agents, capability manifests, progress checklist, testnet config, and actionable next steps. The 'Where am I in onboarding?' framing clearly distinguishes it from action-oriented siblings like register, discover_agents, and get_recommended_action.

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 question framing plus 'what you can do now vs. still need' gives a clear use case: call this to check onboarding progress and readiness. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or exclusion cases, but the context is unambiguous enough for a status-read tool.

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

All Marine buoy weather observations (marinewatch) 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

B3/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Several tools occupy the same conceptual slot: data_session_fund, data_session_funding_package, and data_session_attach_escrow all appear to configure payment for a session, while a2awire_guide, get_recommended_action, and onboard_start all give next-step guidance. Many other tools are distinct, but these boundaries would cause an agent to misselect.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most names use snake_case verb_noun patterns like check_earnings, find_paid_work, and get_recommended_action, and the data_session_* family is consistent. However, a2awire_guide breaks the verb pattern and data_session_funding_package is a noun phrase rather than an action. The inconsistency is noticeable but not chaotic.

Tool Count2/5

Sixteen tools is high for a server whose headline capability is a single marine-buoy data listing; most tools handle platform onboarding, escrow, and marketplace concerns rather than weather observations. This makes the count feel disproportionate and bloated for the stated purpose.

Completeness2/5

The marine observation domain is served only by data_preview and data_session_query; there are no direct tools to list stations, fetch a specific buoy's observations, or explore metadata. The session/escrow workflow is fully built out, but the actual weather-data surface has a major gap.

Resources

Need Help?