Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
environ-mcp

environ-mcp

by renhail
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

查询站点总览

get_overview

Retrieves a station's basic details, current real-time readings, and hourly data for the day in one response, so you can answer complete station-status questions without multiple calls.

Instructions

一次返回站点基本信息 + 当前实时数据 + 当日小时数据。用户问「XX 站点情况怎么样」「给我看下 XX 站的完整数据」时用这个，最省事。

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": {
      "station": "<station>"
    },
    "name": "get_overview"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stationYes站点 ID 或站点名称（支持模糊匹配，也可直接传地名/行业关键字）

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.3.5

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the composite behavior (three data groups returned at once), which is useful beyond the schema, but it does not state read-only semantics, response size, or that data is scoped only to the requested station.

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?

Two sentences: the first front-loads what is returned, the second gives usage triggers. No redundant or filler wording.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a one-parameter, no-output-schema read tool, the description covers what is returned and when to use it, which is sufficient. It could note that this aggregates realtime and hourly data versus calling the dedicated siblings, but nothing critical is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single `station` parameter already documents ID, name, fuzzy matching, and place/industry keywords. The description adds no additional parameter guidance, so the baseline 3 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?

The description states a concrete composite result: basic station info + current realtime data + today's hourly data in one call. That distinguishes it from the narrower siblings get_realtime and get_hour_data, though it does not name them explicitly.

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?

It gives concrete trigger phrases ("XX 站点情况怎么样", "给我看下 XX 站的完整数据") and implies this is the preferred one-shot call ("最省事"). It stops short of stating when NOT to use it or explicitly naming get_realtime/get_hour_data as the narrower alternatives.

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