Skip to main content
Glama
dheerajpatidar212

Weather MCP Server

by dheerajpatidar212
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Server Quality Checklist

58%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.1.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of confusion or overlap. The single tool's purpose is clearly defined and distinct by default.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    The tool name uses a clear verb_noun pattern (get_weather) that aligns with common MCP naming conventions. With only one tool, there is no inconsistency to evaluate.

    Tool Count2/5

    A single tool is too few for a weather server's apparent scope. A weather domain could reasonably include current conditions, alerts, historical data, or location search as separate tools, so this feels undersized.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool covers both current conditions and a multi-day forecast, which addresses the core weather use case. Minor gaps exist, such as no separate alerts or historical data tools, but these are not blocking for basic weather lookups.

  • Average 4.3/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 1 commit in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • Add a LICENSE file by following GitHub's guide. Once GitHub recognizes the license, the system will automatically detect it within a few hours.

    If the license does not appear after some time, you can manually trigger a new scan using the MCP server admin interface.

    MCP servers without a LICENSE cannot be installed.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior3/5

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

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys the read-only nature of the operation and the high-level output (current conditions and forecast), but it does not mention units, error handling, or what the forecast includes, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

    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 description is two sentences plus a two-item Args list. The main purpose is front-loaded, and every line adds either scope or parameter detail, with no filler.

    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 only two parameters, one of which has a default, and an output schema present, the description covers the necessary input semantics and high-level behavior. Gaps like unit conventions are minor given the output schema, so the description is nearly complete.

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

    Parameters5/5

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

    Schema coverage is 0%, yet the description's Args section fully compensates: it defines 'location' as a city, region, or country with examples, and 'forecast_days' as a range from 1 through 7. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the bare schema properties.

    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?

    The description opens with 'Get current conditions and a weather forecast for a place,' which names a specific action (get) and resource (conditions + forecast). This clearly distinguishes the tool's function even in the absence of 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?

    The description clearly communicates that the tool is for retrieving weather data for a location, and the Args section explains how to supply the location and optional forecast length. Since there are no sibling tools, explicit when-not or alternative guidance is unnecessary; the implied usage context is sufficient.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

Weather MCP Server MCP server – quality and maintenance score on Glama

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

Weather MCP Server MCP server – quality and maintenance score on Glama

Copy to your README.md:

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/dheerajpatidar212/mcp-server-app-v1'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server