Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-map-server

mcp-map-server

by ganyu123456
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

map_weather

Retrieve real-time weather and multi-day forecast for any administrative region using its area code (adcode).

Instructions

天气查询：查询某行政区的实时天气与未来几日预报。city 参数需传行政区划编码 adcode（可先用 map_geocode 获取）。

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "city": "<city>"
    },
    "name": "map_weather"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityYes行政区划编码 adcode，如北京'110000'
platformNoMap platform to use. Defaults to 'amap'.amap

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It indicates the tool is read-only (query) but lacks details on data freshness, rate limits, or authentication requirements. Basic purpose is covered, but deeper behavioral context is missing.

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 very concise: two sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second provides key parameter guidance. It is well-structured and easy to read.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description covers the main purpose and parameter usage. However, it does not describe the return format or error handling, leaving some gaps for an agent to interpret the response.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate. The description adds value by explaining that city requires an adcode and suggesting map_geocode to obtain it, and it notes the platform parameter default. This enriches understanding beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: querying real-time weather and future forecasts for an administrative district. The verb 'query' and resource 'weather' are specific, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like map_direction or map_geocode.

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 provides clear instruction on how to use the tool: the city parameter requires an adcode, and it suggests using map_geocode to obtain it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare with siblings.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools