mcp-singapore

singapore_get_relative_humidity

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve Singapore relative humidity readings from NEA by area, region, station, or local date. Omit the date to get the latest values; pagination handles larger result sets.

Instructions

NEA humidity (%). Singapore local dates; latest if omitted. Local limits apply to timestamp groups. Consume local offsets before continuing the preserved upstream pagination token.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`area`	No
`date`	No	Singapore local time UTC+08:00: YYYY-MM-DD or YYYY-MM-DDTHH:mm:ss
`limit`	No
`offset`	No
`region`	No
`station_id`	No
`pagination_token`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	Yes
`data`	No
`error`	No
`status`	No
`sources`	Yes
`metadata`	No
`provider`	No
`warnings`	No
`served_at`	Yes
`error_code`	No
`source_url`	No
`dataset_url`	No
`catalog_metadata`	No
`catalog_snapshot_at`	No
`retry_after_seconds`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior. The description adds pagination-related context about consuming local offsets and preserving an upstream pagination token, but the wording is vague and omits other behavioral details such as rate limits or auth requirements.

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 short and front-loads the data type and unit. The final sentence about local offsets and the preserved upstream pagination token is concise but cryptic, slightly reducing structural clarity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a seven-parameter weather query with low schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It covers date defaults and some pagination behavior, but does not explain most filters or when to use this tool versus related weather tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 14%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It clarifies the date parameter and gestures at pagination token usage, but leaves area, limit, offset, region, and station_id largely unexplained.

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 clearly identifies the resource as NEA humidity with a percentage unit, so an agent can infer it retrieves humidity data. It does not explicitly distinguish this weather tool from sibling weather tools such as singapore_get_air_temperature or singapore_get_rainfall.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

It gives useful date semantics ('Singapore local dates; latest if omitted') but provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over sibling weather tools. There are no exclusions or selection criteria for alternatives.

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

Deploy Server