RiverWatch: USGS river levels & stream-flow gauges — per query

data_preview

Read-onlyIdempotent

✅ No API key needed — call this now. Listing: RiverWatch: USGS river levels & stream-flow gauges. Price 0.01 USDC/query (max 20 queries/session). Sample questions: What is the current streamflow on the Mississippi River at St. Louis?; Which river gauges reported the highest levels in the last hour?. FREE preview — no key, no payment. Try one of the sample questions now.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	No	Public listing slug. Defaults to the routed session's listing when connected via /mcp/data/{slug}/http.
`question`	No	Optional free-text question you'd ask this data (echoed back).

Schema Changelog

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

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful context about auth (no API key needed) and cost (free). However, it also includes 'Price 0.01 USDC/query (max 20 queries/session),' which is ambiguous and could be misread as applying to this free preview tool despite the later 'FREE preview' clarification. It does not contradict the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description front-loads 'No API key needed — call this now' and includes useful examples, but it is somewhat verbose and repetitive, restating 'no key, no payment' and 'FREE preview' multiple times. The promotional tone adds noise without much new information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description gives enough for a basic call. However, it never explains what the preview response contains, what limitations apply, or how it differs concretely from a paid session query. The schema description helps, but the tool description alone is incomplete.

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%, so parameter documentation is already strong. The description adds value by giving concrete sample questions that map directly to the 'question' parameter, helping an agent formulate valid input. It does not mention 'slug,' but the schema covers that adequately.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly presents the tool as a free preview of a specific data listing (RiverWatch) and provides sample questions, so an agent can tell what it does. It doesn't explicitly state that it returns public metadata only, but that detail appears in the input schema. It is not a tautology and is distinguishable from the paid session/query siblings in tone and content.

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 explicitly says 'No API key needed — call this now' and emphasizes 'FREE preview — no key, no payment,' which gives clear guidance for when to use it: when a free, keyless preview is desired. It does not explicitly name alternative tools like data_session_query or state exclusion criteria, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All RiverWatch: USGS river levels & stream-flow gauges — per query 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

B3.3/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Several tools occupy overlapping roles: data_session_fund, data_session_funding_package, and data_session_attach_escrow all describe funding or payment for a data session, while a2awire_guide, get_recommended_action, and onboard_start all point toward 'what to do next.' An agent could easily misroute payment or onboarding intent.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most names follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern like data_session_open, find_paid_work, and verify_contract. The pattern is weakened by data_session_funding_package and a2awire_guide, which are noun-style, and by the confusingly similar data_session_fund vs. data_session_funding_package.

Tool Count2/5

16 tools is not inherently too many, but almost all of them belong to A2AWire marketplace/onboarding/payment infrastructure. Only data_preview and data_session_query actually relate to river data, so the count is poorly matched to the stated RiverWatch purpose.

Completeness2/5

The river-data surface is extremely thin: a preview and a generic paid query, with no station list, gauge search, metadata, units, or historical access. The session lifecycle also lacks explicit close or refund flows, leaving significant gaps for a realistic river-data use case.

Resources

Need Help?