Skip to main content
Glama

MapMap

by ai.mapmap
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

report_map_issue

Report that the live world disagrees with the map, a closed road, a wrong or missing restriction, a bad speed limit, a missing road, a wrong one-way, or changed access. Use it when you observe the mismatch mid-task. Provide location {lat, lon}, a category (road_closed, wrong_restriction, wrong_speed_limit, missing_road, wrong_oneway, access_changed, other) and optionally a description, the OSM way_id and an evidence_url. This is a first-party observation: it is QUEUED for human/agent review and NEVER changes routing immediately or edits any map. Returns the queued report_id.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
way_idNoThe OSM way id the observation concerns, when the caller knows it. Optional, the report stands on its own as a first-party observation and is never tied to OSM data beyond this hint.
categoryYesWhat kind of mismatch this is.
locationYesWhere the mismatch was observed (WGS84 decimal degrees).
descriptionNoFree-text detail of what was observed on the ground, e.g. "barrier across the lane, diversion signed via the B4009". Bounded length.
evidence_urlNoA URL backing the observation (photo, notice, news item), when one exists. Bounded length.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYesAlways "queued": the report awaits human/agent review and changes nothing about routing immediately.
categoryYesThe category, echoed back as its snake_case wire tag.
report_idYesThe generated id of the queued report (cite it in follow-ups).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / way_id / description
      Previous value: -"The OSM way id the observation concerns, when the caller knows it.\nOptional — the report stands on its own as a first-party\nobservation and is never tied to OSM data beyond this hint."New value: +"The OSM way id the observation concerns, when the caller knows it.\nOptional, the report stands on its own as a first-party\nobservation and is never tied to OSM data beyond this hint."
  2. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / $defs / LatLon / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "properties": {
+      "lat": {
+        "description": "Latitude in decimal degrees (−90 to 90).",
+        "format": "double",
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "lon": {
+        "description": "Longitude in decimal degrees (−180 to 180).",
+        "format": "double",
+        "type": "number"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "lat",
+      "lon"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "description": "GeoJSON position [lon, lat]: longitude FIRST.",
+    "items": {
+      "format": "double",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "maxItems": 2,
+    "minItems": 2,
+    "type": "array"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / $defs / LatLon / description
      Previous value: -"A WGS84 coordinate pair in decimal degrees."New value: +"A WGS84 coordinate in decimal degrees: a {lat, lon} object (preferred), or a GeoJSON [lon, lat] array with LONGITUDE FIRST, the same order as every polygon field on this server."
    • removedInput schema / $defs / LatLon / properties
      Removed value: -{
-  "lat": {
-    "description": "Latitude in decimal degrees (−90 to 90).",
-    "format": "double",
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  "lon": {
-    "description": "Longitude in decimal degrees (−180 to 180).",
-    "format": "double",
-    "type": "number"
-  }
-}
    • removedInput schema / $defs / LatLon / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "lat",
-  "lon"
-]
    • removedInput schema / $defs / LatLon / type
      Removed value: -"object"
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it declares the report is QUEUED for human/agent review, NEVER changes routing immediately, and NEVER edits any map, and it names the return value (queued report_id). These are exactly the behavioral facts an agent needs before calling a write-looking tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose, then the safety semantics, then the parameter summary — a sensible order. The enumeration of all seven category values duplicates the schema's const definitions and is the one clearly redundant passage.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are covered elsewhere, and the description supplies the missing behavioral context (queued, non-mutating, first-party observation) plus required vs optional parameters. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is absent.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents location, category, way_id, description, and evidence_url in detail. The description largely restates the parameter list (including the category values already defined as schema consts), adding only optionality framing, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (report) and resource (a live-world/map mismatch), and enumerates concrete mismatch kinds that pin down the scope. It is clearly distinguishable from edit-style siblings like set_temporary_closure or validate_geodata.

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?

It says when to use it ('when you observe the mismatch mid-task') and carefully states the effect is queued and does not change routing, which implicitly contrasts with closure- or edit-type tools. However, it never names an alternative tool or an explicit when-not-to-use condition, which matters given set_temporary_closure and validate_geodata in the sibling set.

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

All MapMap toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources