Skip to main content
Glama
fernandezAlex

mcp-weather-tool

by fernandezAlex
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

🌤️ MCP Weather Tool

Un servidor MCP (Model Context Protocol) simple que permite consultar el clima de cualquier ciudad del mundo.

✨ Características

  • 🔍 Búsqueda por ciudad: Encuentra automáticamente las coordenadas de cualquier ciudad

  • 🌡️ Información del clima: Temperatura, precipitación, estado del día y lluvia

  • 🚀 Integración con Claude: Funciona perfectamente en Claude Desktop

  • 📍 Coordenadas precisas: Usa APIs de geocoding y meteorología confiables

Related MCP server: weather-mcp-server

🛠️ Instalación

  1. Clona el repositorio:

git clone https://github.com/fernandezAlex/mcp-weather-tool.git
cd mcp-weather-tool

  1. Instala las dependencias:

npm install

  1. Compila el proyecto:

npx tsc

⚙️ Configuración en Claude Desktop

Añade esto a tu claude_desktop_config.json:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "mcp-test": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["/ruta/completa/a/mcp-weather-tool/dist/main.js"]
    }
  }
}

🚀 Uso

  1. Reinicia Claude Desktop

  2. Usa la herramienta: "¿Cuál es el clima en Madrid?"

  3. Disfruta de la información meteorológica en tiempo real

📡 APIs Utilizadas

🏗️ Estructura del Proyecto

mcp-weather-tool/
├── main.ts          # Código fuente del servidor MCP
├── dist/            # Archivos compilados
├── package.json     # Dependencias del proyecto
└── README.md        # Este archivo

🔧 Tecnologías

  • TypeScript - Lenguaje principal

  • Node.js - Runtime de JavaScript

  • MCP SDK - Protocolo de comunicación con Claude

  • Fetch API - Llamadas HTTP a APIs externas

👨‍💻 Autor

Alex Fernández - Frontend Developer & Designer

📝 Licencia

MIT License - Libre para uso personal y comercial

Desarrollado con ❤️ por @fernandezAlex para la comunidad de Claude

Available Tools

1 tool
fetch-weatherC

Tool to fetch the weather of a city

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityYesCity name

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action but doesn't mention possible restrictions, return format, or side effects, though 'fetch' implicitly suggests a read-only operation.

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 a single concise sentence, easy to parse and front-loaded. It wastes no words, though it sacrifices detail for brevity.

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?

Given a single parameter and no output schema, the description is minimal but incomplete. It doesn't clarify what 'weather' includes (current conditions, forecast), nor does it specify city name format or possible response structure.

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?

The schema description fully covers the single parameter 'city' with 'City name'. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states the verb 'fetch' and the resource 'weather of a city', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. Though it doesn't differentiate from siblings (none exist), it's specific enough for a simple task.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool, what input formats are expected, or any prerequisites. The usage context is merely implied by the description.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 1 tool updatev1.0.0
    • First observedfetch-weather
Deploy Server
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

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no ambiguity or overlap. The purpose is clearly defined as fetching weather for a city.

Naming Consistency5/5

The single tool name 'fetch-weather' follows a consistent verb-noun pattern, which is predictable and clear.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool is too few for a weather service, which typically requires multiple operations such as current conditions, forecasts, and historical data. The apparent scope of a weather tool is broader than what one fetch operation can cover.

Completeness3/5

The tool provides basic weather fetching but lacks common weather operations like forecasts or historical data. This leaves noticeable gaps in the tool surface for a weather domain.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers