Skip to main content
Glama

Sunshine Atlas

by com.sunshineatlas
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Server Details

Where is it sunny? Monthly sunshine scores, temps, rain, UV and sea temp for 3,833 destinations.

If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership by verifying the domain or GitHub account it belongs to. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.
Status
Healthy
Uptime
99.9% over 69 days
Last Tested
Transport
Streamable HTTP · MCP 2025-11-25
URL

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Scored across 3 tools

Disambiguation4/5

compare_destinations handles 2–5 place comparisons, find_sunny_destinations handles ranked discovery for a month, and get_destination_climate handles one destination's full 12-month card. The boundaries are mostly clear, though find_sunny_destinations and get_destination_climate both return climate details and could occasionally be confused when an agent just wants a single place's month data.

Naming Consistency5/5

All three tools use verb-first snake_case (compare_destinations, find_sunny_destinations, get_destination_climate). The compound nouns vary slightly but the convention is predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools is well-scoped for a read-only climate atlas: compare, discover/rank, and inspect one destination. Each has a clear role without redundancy.

Completeness4/5

Covers comparison, filtered discovery, and full climate detail for a destination, which addresses the main sunshine-planning workflows. A general browse/list-all or name-search tool is absent, but get_destination_climate's name/airport lookup largely covers that gap.

Available Tools

3 tools
compare_destinationsCompare destinationsAInspect

Side-by-side sunshine/climate comparison of 2–5 destinations — overall or for one month ("Algarve or Crete in October?"). Returns each place's Sunshine Score, temperatures, rain, midday UV index and sea temperature, plus a one-line verdict of which is sunnier.

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
monthNoOptional month to compare in; omit for year-round comparison
destinationsYes2–5 destinations (city, "city, country", or IATA code)

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose the return payload in useful detail (Sunshine Score, temperatures, rain, UV index, sea temperature, a one-line verdict). It does not cover failure behavior for unrecognized destinations or any rate/permission constraints, so it is thorough but not complete.

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?

A single sentence leads with the core action and scope, then adds one parenthetical example and one clause on return values. Nothing is redundant and the most important information comes first.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a two-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies what the agent needs: what is compared, how many places, and what comes back. Only edge-case behavior (invalid or ambiguous destination names) is left unaddressed.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%: the schema already documents the destinations array (2–5 items, city / "city, country" / IATA forms) and the optional month. The description reinforces the 2–5 limit and the month usage but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 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 states a specific verb and resource — a side-by-side sunshine/climate comparison of 2–5 destinations — and scopes it (overall vs. a single month). The comparative, multi-destination framing implicitly separates it from the single-place get_destination_climate sibling.

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?

It gives a concrete triggering question ("Algarve or Crete in October?") and states the overall-vs-month choice, which tells an agent when to reach for it. It stops short of naming find_sunny_destinations or get_destination_climate as the alternatives for non-comparison cases.

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

find_sunny_destinationsFind sunny destinationsAInspect

Ranked answer to "where is it sunny (and warm) in ?" — destinations sorted by that month's 0–100 Sunshine Score (long-term climate normals). Filter by continent or country, minimum daytime temperature, population, swimmable sea (≥21°C), or a ceiling on the midday UV index. Every result carries that month's temperatures, rain, midday UV (WHO scale) and sea temperature, plus a citable sunshineatlas.com URL.

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoHow many results (default 10, max 50)
monthYesMonth name ("November", "nov") or number 1–12
whereNoOptional continent ("Europe", "Asia", "North America", …) or country (name or ISO-2 code) to search within. "Europe" uses the traveler definition and includes the Canary Islands.
max_midday_uvNoOnly places whose typical midday UV index that month is at or below this (WHO scale: ≤2 low, ≤5 moderate, ≤7 high). For sun-sensitive travellers — "sunny but not fierce".
min_day_high_cNoOnly places at least this warm by day that month, °C
min_populationNoOnly places with at least this population (default 0 = include small islands and outposts)
require_swimmable_seaNoOnly coastal places with sea ≥21°C that month

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well: it discloses the ranking basis, data source (long-term climate normals), filtering behavior, and the per-result fields including temperatures, rain, UV, sea temperature, and a citable URL. It does not mention permissions, rate limits, or error behavior, but those are minor for a read-only ranked search.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and ranking basis, and it is reasonably efficient despite being dense. The filter list and output-field sentence are useful, though they partly duplicate schema details that are already fully documented.

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?

Although there are no annotations or output schema, the description explains the ranking method, data source, filters, and returned fields including a citable URL, which is enough for correct selection and invocation. Required inputs, defaults, and limits are covered by the schema.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters, making 3 the baseline. The description summarizes the filter concepts but adds no syntax, defaults, or format details beyond what the schema provides; for example, the 'Europe' traveler definition including the Canary Islands appears only in the schema.

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 states a specific search/ranking purpose: destinations ranked by a month-specific 0–100 Sunshine Score from long-term climate normals. It clearly distinguishes this as a ranked search tool, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings compare_destinations or get_destination_climate.

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 use case is clear from the framing 'where is it sunny (and warm) in <month>?' and the available filters. It does not name alternatives or explain when to use compare_destinations or get_destination_climate instead, so it lacks explicit exclusions or sibling routing.

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

get_destination_climateDestination climate & best time to visitAInspect

Full climate card for one destination: 0–100 Sunshine Score, day/night °C, rainfall, midday UV index (WHO scale) and sea temperature for all 12 months, plus its sunniest month ("best time to visit" for sunshine), annual sunshine hours and peak midday UV. Accepts a city name ("Faro"), "city, country" ("Nice, France") or IATA airport code ("FAO").

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
destinationYesCity name, "city, country", or 3-letter IATA airport code

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It thoroughly lists the output data fields and accepted input formats, but it does not address error behavior, data source, or any read-only implications. It is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 compact: two sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the tool's core purpose and outputs, while the second covers input formats. Every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given there is no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating all returned metrics and the sunniest month, which is crucial for an agent. It also specifies input format variants. It is complete for the tool's apparent simplicity, though it leaves out edge-case handling, which is a minor gap.

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 schema already describes the parameter with 100% coverage, but the description adds concrete examples ('Faro', 'Nice, France', 'FAO') and reiterates the three accepted formats, which helps clarify exactly how to format the destination value. This goes beyond the schema's baseline.

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 unambiguously states the tool provides a 'Full climate card for one destination' and enumerates the specific metrics (Sunshine Score, temperatures, rainfall, UV, sea temperature). It clearly distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing 'one destination' as opposed to comparison or discovery tools.

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 clearly implies usage for a single destination's climate details, effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like compare_destinations and find_sunny_destinations. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives or provide explicit exclusions, 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.

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 2 tool updates
    • Changedcompare_destinations2 fields changed
      • removedInput schema / properties / month / anyOf
        Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  }
-]
      • addedInput schema / properties / month / type
        Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "number"
+]
    • Changedfind_sunny_destinations2 fields changed
      • removedInput schema / properties / month / anyOf
        Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  }
-]
      • addedInput schema / properties / month / type
        Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "number"
+]
  2. 1 tool update
    • Changedfind_sunny_destinations1 field changed
      • addedInput schema / properties / max_midday_uv
        Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only places whose typical midday UV index that month is at or below this (WHO scale: ≤2 low, ≤5 moderate, ≤7 high). For sun-sensitive travellers — \"sunny but not fierce\".",
+  "type": "number"
+}
  3. 3 tool updates
    • First observedcompare_destinations
    • First observedfind_sunny_destinations
    • First observedget_destination_climate

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • Sunshine Atlas MCP server

    Flightmussy
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Provides climate data for 3,833 destinations including sunshine scores, temperatures, rainfall, and sea temperature, enabling users to find sunny destinations and compare climates via three tools.
    3
    MIT

  • CoastWise MCP

    alirezashamsaei
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    B
    maintenance
    Enables users to check whether a beach suits a beach day or a surf session today or up to six days ahead, using Open-Meteo weather and marine forecasts scored by deterministic, documented rules. It exposes tools for raw hourly forecast data, suitability scores and verdicts by activity and skill level, and finding the best multi-hour window within a day.
    MIT

  • MCP Weather Server

    1broseidon
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Provides real-time weather information and multi-day forecasts for global locations using city names, coordinates, or ZIP codes. It includes tools for current conditions, forecasting, and weather summaries designed for activity planning.
    7 npm
    MIT
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources