mugilu

conditions_at

Read-onlyIdempotent

What the sky is doing at a place in India RIGHT NOW (not a forecast): air quality (CPCB AQI + pollutants + AQLI years-of-life-lost), heat (feels-like, wet-bulb, WBGT), cold, rain, wind, fog/visibility, dust, fire-smoke, UV, and any official NDMA warning over that spot, plus an Ambient read naming the single worst hazard and the readings in order of risk (ambient.order). Separately, where it stands out, today's modelled daily high (the model's estimate for the whole local day, so partly forecast early in the day) against the 1991-2020 normal there. Pass persona to weight it for a vulnerable person. To target a specific ward, hospital, forest, river or boundary, resolve it with a geo source (e.g. the bharatlas MCP) first, then pass the coordinate here. Surface the returned attribution and disclaimer.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "place": "<place>"
    },
    "name": "conditions_at"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`place`	Yes	A place in India: a name ("Bengaluru", "Indiranagar") or a coordinate "lat,lon".
`persona`	No	Weight the read for who is affected (default everyone).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the read-only/idempotent/open-world profile, but the description adds real behavior: readings come back ordered by risk via `ambient.order`, the daily high is a model estimate that is partly forecast early in the day, and the caller is instructed to surface `attribution` and `disclaimer`. It does not mention rate limits, error modes, or latency.

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 core purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, but the sentence then runs long through a dense hazard enumeration and mixes purpose, return contents, caveats, and routing instructions in one block. The hazard list earns some of its space for routing, yet a sentence or two could be trimmed or split for scannability.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns, and it does so thoroughly: hazard categories, the `ambient` summary with ordering, the modelled daily-high comparison against 1991-2020 normals, and mandatory attribution/disclaimer. Only operational details like failure behavior and cost/latency are absent.

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% and the schema already defines both parameters, so baseline applies, but the description genuinely adds: it explains that `place` can be resolved from geo sources for sub-city targets, and frames `persona` as weighting for a vulnerable person rather than a neutral filter. This goes beyond the enum list in the 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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'What the sky is doing at a place in India RIGHT NOW (not a forecast)', then enumerates the hazard domains covered. The parenthetical exclusion of forecasts and the place-anchored scope make it clearly distinguishable from national- or warning-level siblings.

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?

Gives clear usage context: use for current conditions, not forecasts; resolve non-name targets (ward, hospital, forest, river, boundary) with a geo source like bharatlas before calling; use `persona` for vulnerable people. It does not explicitly say when to prefer this over `national_now` or `active_warnings`, leaving that boundary to inference.

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

All mugilu 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.