PeakCam Snow

Search resorts

search_resorts

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find PeakCam resorts by name (or part of one, or a region) and get their slugs with a one-line snow summary each. Call this first when the user names a resort; then use the slug with the other tools. Covers about 300 resorts in the US, Canada, Chile and Argentina.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Rows to return, 1–20.
`query`	Yes	Resort name or fragment, e.g. `vail`, `big sky`, `portillo`, `tahoe`. Also matches region names.
`state`	No	US state or Canadian province code (`CO`, `UT`, `BC`), or for the Andes the country name PeakCam lists (`Chile`, `Argentina`). Case-insensitive.
`country`	No	ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code: `US`, `CA`, `CL` or `AR`.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`count`	Yes
`query`	Yes
`resorts`	Yes
`generatedAt`	Yes	ISO-8601 UTC instant the result was generated.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 20, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / resorts / items / properties / score

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "date": {
+          "description": "YYYY-MM-DD.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "rating": {
+          "enum": [
+            "great",
+            "good",
+            "fair",
+            "poor"
+          ],
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "score": {
+          "maximum": 100,
+          "minimum": 0,
+          "type": "integer"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "date",
+        "score",
+        "rating"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Today's Snow Score (P7); null before the first scoring run, absent when the table is not served. Components at `/resorts/{slug}/score-components`."
+}

First observedOct 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope context the annotations cannot convey: ~300 resorts and the four countries covered, plus the fact that matching is fuzzy (name fragment or region). No rate-limit or pagination behavior, but little is left ambiguous.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and return value, followed by the workflow instruction and the coverage scope. No filler; every clause carries information.

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 needn't explain return shape, and it still summarizes the snow-summary payload. Annotations cover safety, schema covers all params, and the description adds scope plus the call-order cue — nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters (query, limit, state, country) are already documented with examples and ranges. The description restates the fuzzy-name/region matching that the query param already documents, adding no new syntax or format guidance. 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 ('Find PeakCam resorts by name... and get their slugs') plus the returned payload ('one-line snow summary each'). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_regions (browsing) and get_resort_profile (detail by slug).

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?

Explicit sequencing: 'Call this first when the user names a resort; then use the slug with the other tools' — this is real routing guidance for the multi-tool workflow. It doesn't name an alternative for the case where the user does NOT name a resort (list_regions would be the natural fallback), so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.

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

All PeakCam Snow 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.