DatoQA

get_weather

Read-onlyIdempotent

Official NWS forecast for one supported US city grid point; use list_weather_locations for city ids. Celsius day/night forecast highs/lows, not current observed weather or alerts. English source text, explicit periods and source update time. Hourly retrieval, expires within two hours. Not independently verified.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`city`	Yes	Supported US grid-point identifier from list_weather_locations; not a free-text city name or worldwide location.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`items`	Yes
`notice`	No
`status`	Yes	Read this before using values; a successful transport does not establish data availability.
`returned`	Yes	Domain-specific result count, not necessarily the number of stored records in items.
`directory`	No
`independently_verified`	No	Official-source checks are not independent factual corroboration.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 27, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / items / items / properties / provenance / properties / verification_level / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "official_source_and_schema_checked",
-  "method_specific"
-]New value: +[
+  "official_source_and_schema_checked",
+  "public_aggregator_and_schema_checked",
+  "method_specific"
+]

First observedSep 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description goes further: hourly retrieval cadence, two-hour expiry of values, English source text, explicit periods, source update time, and a not-independently-verified caveat. These are behavioral traits an agent cannot derive from the annotations or schema.

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?

Very dense and front-loaded: purpose first, then disambiguation, then behavioral caveats. Every clause carries information (units, periods, staleness, verification status) with 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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, and it still supplies the freshness, source-language and verification context that matters for interpreting the forecast. Nothing an agent needs to call or trust the tool is missing.

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?

Only one parameter, and the schema already describes it at 100% coverage including the pattern and the 'not free-text' constraint. The description's reference to city ids adds nothing beyond what the schema states, 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Official NWS forecast for one supported US city grid point') and narrows scope immediately to a single supported grid point. The addition that it is a Celsius day/night high/low forecast, not observed weather, separates it from any sibling reader. An agent can identify the tool without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly routes the agent to list_weather_locations for city ids, and states exclusions ('not current observed weather or alerts'). Both the when-to-use and the when-not-to-use conditions are present, with a named alternative.

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

All DatoQA tools Inspect

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

Need Help?