google-weather-mcp

get_current_weather

Get current weather conditions for a city or coordinates. View temperature, wind, and humidity in metric or imperial units.

Instructions

Current conditions from the Google Maps Platform Weather API for a place or coordinates.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_current_weather"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	No	City or place name, e.g. Chennai or Mountain View, CA
`units`	No	METRIC (C, km) or IMPERIAL (F, miles). Default METRIC.
`latitude`	No	Latitude in decimal degrees
`longitude`	No	Longitude in decimal degrees

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Sep 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the API source and the core behavior of returning current conditions. It does not mention response shape, default unit behavior, or what happens if both place and coordinates are supplied, but for a simple read-only weather tool the disclosure is adequate.

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?

The entire description is a single 14-word sentence that front-loads the essential purpose. There is no filler or repetition of the schema.

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?

For a simple current-weather tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns and the two ways to specify location, while the input schema covers parameter details. It could mention request precedence or return fields, but nothing critical 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents query, units, latitude, and longitude. The description adds only the high-level distinction that a place or coordinates can be used, which is already visible in the schema, so it stays at the baseline.

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 identifies a specific verb and resource: retrieving current conditions from the Weather API, for either a place name or coordinates. 'Current' helps distinguish it from the hourly and daily forecast siblings, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from get_weather_dashboard.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies the tool is for current conditions, which an agent can infer should be used instead of hourly or daily forecasts. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and does not name alternative tools.

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

Deploy Server