Skip to main content
Glama

foncier_geocode

Geocode a French address → coordinates, canonical label, INSEE code.

Returns candidates (label, score, lat, lon, citycode, postcode, type), best first. The BAN label is a canonical address key (two spellings converge on one point). type grades the match: housenumber (exact door) > street > locality > municipality — a locality answer to a numbered query is NOT the address.

Postcode fallback: SIRENE addresses often carry the commune's generic postcode (80000 Amiens) while the BAN indexes the real one for that stretch (80090). The query then yields only a low-score locality. When the query carries a street number and no housenumber comes back, this retries WITHOUT the postcode (both the argument and the one written in the address) — those candidates are tagged relaxed="postcode". If that still finds no housenumber, every candidate is tagged warning="no_housenumber_match": treat them as approximate.

The reverse direction (point → nearest address) is foncier_site(op="adresse").

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": {
      "adresse": "<adresse>"
    },
    "name": "foncier_geocode"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_orgNoOrg (id) de CET APPEL. `oto_list_orgs()`.
limitNomax candidates (default 5).
_groupNoÉquipe (id) de CET APPEL, sous son org parente.
_run_idNoOBLIGATOIRE à chaque appel dès `run_start` ou `data_claim_next` : sans lui, l'écriture sur une ligne réservée est refusée. Hérité seulement si le serveur tient un run actif — n'y compte pas.
adresseYesfree-form address (e.g. "44 la canebière marseille").
_projectNoProjet (id) de CET APPEL — jeton PRIMAIRE. `oto_project(op='list')`.
_instanceNoInstance de connecteur PRÉCISE (un credential exact). `oto_instance(op='list')`.
code_postalNorestrict to a postcode.
code_communeNorestrict to an INSEE commune code. Safer than code_postal to narrow a search — a commune code is stable, a postcode is not.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
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 discloses the hidden automatic retry that strips the postcode, the `relaxed="postcode"` and `warning="no_housenumber_match"` tags the caller will see, and the match-type ranking that determines whether a result is trustworthy. These are non-obvious behaviors an agent could not infer from the schema alone.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded in the first line and the remaining paragraphs are organized by concern (return shape, type grading, postcode fallback, reverse direction). It is dense but nearly every sentence carries operational information; only the enumeration of return fields slightly duplicates the output schema.

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?

For a geocoder with an output schema and nine parameters, the description supplies the missing operational semantics: what the score and type mean, what the fallback tags signify, and where the reverse operation lives. Nothing an agent needs in order to interpret a weak result 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 coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already documented, and the description mostly restates the `adresse` input and the postcode interaction. It does add useful context that a postcode can be wrong for SIRENE-derived addresses, which explains why a filter may silently narrow results, but it adds nothing about `code_commune` or `limit`.

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 opening line gives a specific verb and resource ("Geocode a French address → coordinates, canonical label, INSEE code") and names what is returned. The closing line explicitly separates it from the reverse-direction sibling foncier_site(op="adresse"), so an agent can distinguish the two without opening a schema.

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 states clearly when the tool applies (French address to coordinates) and routes the opposite direction to foncier_site, plus it explains the postcode-fallback situation that triggers a retry. It does not give explicit when-not-to-use guidance for cases where a commune code should be preferred, though the schema covers that.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources