USGS Water Monitoring

get_water_levels

Get recent water level and streamflow data for a USGS monitoring site.

Returns time-series data including discharge (streamflow) and gage height
for the specified monitoring station.

Args:
    site_number: USGS site number (e.g. '01646500' for Potomac River at Little Falls).
    days: Number of days of data to retrieve (default 7, max 120).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`days`	No
`site_number`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state that the tool returns time-series data and notes the max days constraint, but it doesn't mention potential errors, data availability issues, or any other behavioral traits beyond the basic read operation.

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 tightly written: a two-sentence overview followed by a structured Args list. Every sentence contributes meaningful information without any fluff or 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, output schema present), the description is complete. It covers purpose and parameters thoroughly; return value details are delegated to the output schema, which is appropriate.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description's Args section fully compensates by explaining both parameters. It provides a concrete example for site_number and specifies the default and maximum for days, adding meaning well beyond the bare 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?

The first sentence clearly states the tool retrieves recent water level and streamflow data for a USGS monitoring site. It is specific with a verb+resource and even includes an example site number, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_flood_status and get_sites_by_state.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for retrieving time-series data from a specific site but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. For instance, it doesn't mention that get_flood_status should be used for flood-specific queries or get_sites_by_state for site discovery.

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

All USGS Water Monitoring 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

A4.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool serves a clearly distinct purpose: flood status, site discovery, and water level data. There is no overlap or ambiguity between the tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent 'get_' + descriptive noun pattern (get_flood_status, get_sites_by_state, get_water_levels). The naming convention is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

With only 3 tools, the server is tightly scoped and each tool earns its place. The count is appropriate for a focused monitoring data access server.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the primary workflow: discover sites, retrieve water levels, and check flood conditions. No obvious gaps exist for the server's stated purpose.

Resources

Need Help?