Skip to main content
Glama
nicglazkov

CommuteScout

by nicglazkov
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

get_wildfires

Read-only

Check active California wildfires near a highway or location, with size, containment, and nearby major roads.

Instructions

Active California wildfires, flagged when close to a major highway.

Data: the interagency WFIGS current-wildfire feed (NIFC) - name, size in acres, percent contained, discovery date. Points are each fire's ORIGIN, not its perimeter: a large fire can affect roads far from this point. Refresh: 5-minute cache; size/containment typically update once or twice a day. Small, fast-moving local fires may appear in CHP incident logs (get_incidents, type "FIRE-Report of Fire") before this feed has them.

Filters:

  • near_route (e.g. "I-5", "101") - only fires within ~10 miles of that highway's corridor line.

  • center "lat,lon" with radius_km - fires around a place, regardless of highway. Without either, every active CA fire is returned, each carrying a near_highways list of major corridors within ~10 miles (empty = not near a covered major highway; it may still affect local roads).

This tool does NOT know about road closures caused by fires - cross-check get_incidents and get_lane_closures for the affected area.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
centerNo
radius_kmNo
near_routeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.82.1

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description substantially expands on both: it discloses the 5-minute cache, the once-or-twice-daily update cadence for size/containment, that points are ORIGIN not perimeter, and that small fires may appear in CHP logs first. No contradictions with annotations.

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 long but every section earns its place: data-source context, the origin-not-perimeter caveat, filter semantics, and the cross-check warning. It is organized with clear headers and front-loads the tool's core purpose before details.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Even without an output schema, the description covers key return fields (name, size in acres, percent contained, discovery date, near_highways list) and explains the empty-list case. It also covers the main limitation (no road-closure awareness) and refresh behavior, making it complete for an agent deciding how and when to invoke it.

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%, so the description carries full responsibility for parameter meaning, and it delivers: near_route is explained with examples ('I-5', '101') and a ~10-mile corridor threshold; center 'lat,lon' with radius_km is explained; and the no-filter default behavior is explicitly described.

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 'Active California wildfires, flagged when close to a major highway,' naming a specific verb, resource, and scope. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by specifying the WFIGS/NIFC data source and noting it is not about road closures.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives explicit selection guidance: use the near_route or center+radius_km filters for targeted queries, and notes when to prefer get_incidents for small fast-moving fires. It also explicitly says to cross-check get_incidents and get_lane_closures for road closures, which this tool does NOT cover.

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