Look up AMeDAS station information by station code to identify observation stations for JMA weather data. Enter a station code (e.g., 44132 for Tokyo) to get location details.
Get AMeDAS station information by station code.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| code | Yes | Station code (e.g., '44132' for Tokyo) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.1Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +falseInput schema / properties / code / descriptionAdded value: +"Station code (e.g., '44132' for Tokyo)"Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only states 'get information' without disclosing what fields or behaviors to expect. Minimal additional context.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence, front-loaded with verb, no redundant words. Efficiently communicates purpose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given output schema exists and only one required parameter, description is sufficient for a simple lookup tool. No missing critical information.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, but description adds an example code ('44132' for Tokyo), providing practical context beyond the schema definition.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clear verb ('Get'), specific resource ('AMeDAS station information'), and method ('by station code'). Distinct from sibling tools like get_current_weather or list_stations.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_stations or get_stations_of_type. Usage is implied by parameter but lacks explicit context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.