Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
erddap-mcp

erddap-mcp

by mrfentmen
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

list_servers

Discover curated public ERDDAP ocean-data servers for SST, Argo floats, gliders, buoys, and EMODnet, so you can choose an endpoint before querying oceanographic data.

Instructions

List the curated public ERDDAP ocean-data servers this MCP knows (SST, Argo floats, gliders, buoys, EMODnet…).

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": "list_servers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
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. It does disclose meaningful scope — the list is 'curated' and limited to what 'this MCP knows' — which signals a static, bounded inventory rather than a live query, and a zero-parameter list tool carries minimal risk. It does not state that the call is read-only or what the entries contain.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the parenthetical examples add concrete value rather than padding.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should say what an entry looks like (server key/ID, URL, dataset coverage) since those identifiers are presumably needed for follow-up calls. It tells the agent what the tool returns conceptually but not in a form it can act on.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — listing curated public ERDDAP ocean-data servers known to this MCP — and even enumerates representative data domains (SST, Argo, gliders, buoys, EMODnet). It is clearly not search_datasets or query_tabledap, though it never names a sibling to reinforce the distinction.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is a discovery/enumeration step preceding search_datasets. There is no explicit statement of when to call it, when not to, or how it relates to the sibling tools.

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