get_documentationSearch the Smarter Weather developer documentation index (quickstart, REST API, MCP server, errors, rate limits, SDKs, pricing, API keys). Returns up to 5 matching entries with title, URL, and an actionable summary. No authentication required.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Search terms, e.g. "authenticate rest api" (max 200 chars) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description correctly aligns with safety. It adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations by specifying that no authentication is required and by detailing the result shape: up to 5 entries with title, URL, and an actionable summary. This is useful given there is no output schema.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is exactly two sentences with zero filler: the first front-loads the resource and scope, the second covers return format and authentication. Every sentence carries distinct information that an agent needs.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is complete: it states the full topic scope, the return result count and fields, and the authentication requirement. Annotations cover the safety profile, so nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100% and the single 'query' parameter is already described with an example ('authenticate rest api') and length constraints. The tool description does not add extra parameter-level meaning beyond indicating that the query targets the documentation index, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Search') and names the exact resource ('Smarter Weather developer documentation index'), with an enumerated list of topics including quickstart, REST API, MCP server, errors, rate limits, SDKs, pricing, and API keys. This makes it immediately distinguishable from siblings like get_plans and sign_up, which target billing and registration rather than documentation lookup.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implicitly signals when to use the tool by enumerating doc categories and noting that no authentication is required, which is a real usage condition. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough that an agent would know to invoke it for documentation lookups rather than for plans or sign-up.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct purpose: retrieving documentation, retrieving plans/pricing, and initiating sign-up. There is no overlap or confusion between them.
Naming follows a clear get_/sign_ pattern. 'sign_up' breaks the verb-noun pattern slightly, but the convention is still predictable and readable.
Three tools is appropriate for a narrowly scoped onboarding server. It is slightly thin but not unreasonable given the stated purpose.
The sign_up tool explicitly instructs the agent to call create_api_key and configure_mcp afterwards, but those tools do not exist in this server. This is a severe gap that will cause agent workflows to fail.