get_packFree discovery. Returns detailed metadata, coverage, freshness, preferred canonical tool guidance, and first-query examples for one pack. Call this before querying a new pack so you can see time shape, coverage limits, and the paste-ready first query.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pack_id | Yes | Pack identifier from get_catalog. Newly catalog-admitted packs require no MCP schema change. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With readOnlyHint=true already provided, the description adds value by enumerating the exact types of information returned (metadata, coverage, freshness, canonical tool guidance, first-query examples). It reinforces the non-destructive nature and gives a concrete sense of the output without contradicting the annotation.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's classification ('Free discovery') and the primary action ('Returns...'). Every phrase contributes meaning, and the usage instruction is placed at the end without redundancy. No filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs to know: what it returns (detailed list), why to call it (before querying a new pack), and that it's free/safe. The readOnlyHint annotation handles safety, and the input schema covers the parameter. Nothing essential is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100% and already specifies pack_id as 'Pack identifier from get_catalog.' The description only adds a trivial confirmation ('for one pack') that doesn't significantly enhance understanding of the parameter beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('detailed metadata, coverage, freshness, preferred canonical tool guidance, and first-query examples') for a single pack. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like get_catalog (which lists packs) and get_geometry (which fetches geometry) by emphasizing 'one pack' and 'discovery'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The instruction 'Call this before querying a new pack' provides explicit when-to-use context and the rationale ('see time shape, coverage limits, and the paste-ready first query'). It does not mention exclusions or name alternatives directly, but the guidance is clear enough for an agent to recognize the appropriate scenario.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: discovery (get_catalog, get_pack), geometry retrieval (get_geometry), hierarchy (loc_id_info, resolve_loc_id_scope), relationship analysis (compare_geographies), preflight (check_geometry), export estimation and creation (estimate_geometry_package, create_geometry_export), job status (get_job_status), and help (get_tool_help). Even closely related tools like check_geometry and estimate_geometry_package address different concerns (shape availability vs export artifact), leaving no ambiguity.
Most tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (check_geometry, compare_geographies, create_geometry_export, estimate_geometry_package, get_catalog, get_geometry, get_job_status, get_pack, get_tool_help, resolve_loc_id_scope). However, 'loc_id_info' breaks the pattern by being a noun phrase rather than a verb action, causing a minor deviation from the otherwise uniform convention.
With 11 tools, the server covers the key operations for administrative boundary data—discovery, geometry retrieval, hierarchy navigation, comparison, export, and job management—without overreach. Each tool is necessary for a coherent workflow, and the count fits well within the typical 3-15 range for a domain-specific MCP server.
The tool set effectively covers the full lifecycle needed for administrative boundary use: discovery (catalog/pack), preflight checks, geometry retrieval, hierarchical navigation, relationship analysis, export estimation/creation, and job status. It includes essential utilities like get_tool_help for onboarding. No obvious gaps exist for the server's purpose; if anything, it is notably thorough for read/export operations.