Skip to main content
Glama
Buienradar MCP Server

Buienradar MCP Server

by wpnbos

Buienradar MCP 서버

대장간 배지

개요

Buienradar를 사용하여 주어진 위도와 경도의 강수량 데이터를 가져오는 MCP 서버입니다. 다음 두 시간 동안의 강수량 예보를 제공하는 get_precipitation_for 라는 단일 MCP 도구를 제공합니다.

Smithery를 통해 설치

Smithery를 통해 Claude Desktop용 Buienradar MCP 서버를 자동으로 설치하려면:

지엑스피1

Related MCP server: Buienradar MCP Server

구성

먼저, uv (및 Python)가 설치되어 있는지 확인하세요.

이 서버를 Claude for Desktop 과 통합하려면 다음 위치에서 구성 파일을 업데이트하세요.

맥OS/리눅스

~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json

윈도우

code $env:AppData\Claude\claude_desktop_config.json

구성 예:

{
    "mcpServers": {
        "precipitation": {
            "command": "uv",
            "args": [
                "--directory",
                "/ABSOLUTE/PATH/TO/PARENT/FOLDER/buienradar-mcp-server",
                "run",
                "server.py"
            ]
        }
    }
}

/ABSOLUTE/PATH/TO/PARENT/FOLDER/buienradar-mcp-server 서버가 위치한 실제 경로로 바꾸세요.

도구를 사용할 수 있도록 데스크톱용 Claude를 다시 시작하세요.

uv 대신 uv 의 전체 경로를 입력해야 할 수도 있습니다. uv 실행 파일의 전체 경로를 찾으려면 MacOS/Linux에서 which uv 실행하세요.

용법

만약 모든 것이 잘 되었다면, 클로드에게 다가올 강수에 대해 물어볼 수 있을 것입니다.

> Will there be any rain soon in Amsterdam?

> No rain predicted in Amsterdam for the next 2 hours.

Available Tools

1 tool
get_precipitation_forC

Fetches precipitation data for the next 2 hours from Buienradar.

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latYes
lonYes

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it fetches data without disclosing behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, data freshness, error conditions, or response format. It mentions the source (Buienradar) but not what that implies for reliability or availability.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero waste—it directly states the tool's function, time scope, and data source. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given no annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on parameters, return values, error handling, and operational constraints, which are critical for a data-fetching tool with required inputs.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no information about the parameters (lat, lon). It doesn't explain what these represent (latitude/longitude coordinates), valid ranges, units, or how they affect the data fetched, leaving parameters completely undocumented.

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 clearly states the action ('fetches precipitation data') and resource ('from Buienradar'), with specific time scope ('for the next 2 hours'). It doesn't need to differentiate from siblings since none exist, but could be more specific about what precipitation data includes (e.g., rainfall intensity, probability).

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives or prerequisites. The description mentions the data source (Buienradar) but doesn't explain limitations or appropriate contexts for use, leaving the agent without operational context.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 1 tool updatev1.0.0
    • First observedget_precipitation_for

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The tool's purpose is clearly defined and distinct by default.

Naming Consistency5/5

A single tool inherently has perfect naming consistency, as there are no other tools to compare it against. The naming follows a clear verb_noun pattern (get_precipitation_for).

Tool Count2/5

One tool is too few for a weather data server, as it severely limits functionality. A Buienradar server should ideally include tools for forecasts, radar images, or location-based queries, making this set incomplete and under-scoped.

Completeness1/5

The tool set is severely incomplete for a weather data domain. It only provides precipitation data for a short timeframe, with no coverage for forecasts, historical data, radar visuals, or other essential weather parameters, leading to significant gaps in functionality.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo recent community issues

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers