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?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe, non-mutating nature is established. The description adds context about what kind of information is returned ('coverage, freshness, preferred canonical tool guidance, first-query examples') but does not go further into rate limits, errors, or other behavioral traits. With annotations covering the core safety profile, this is adequate but not exceptional.
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?
Two sentences are used with no wasted words. The key behavioral instruction ('free discovery') is front-loaded, followed by the return contents and the when-to-use guidance. Every sentence earns its place.
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 gets back and when to call it. It names the return categories and the intended workflow step, which is sufficient for reliable invocation.
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%: pack_id is described as 'Pack identifier from get_catalog.' The description does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond implying the pack_id selects a single pack. Since the schema carries the full parameter documentation, the baseline of 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 gives a specific verb ('Returns') and a clear resource ('detailed metadata, coverage, freshness, preferred canonical tool guidance, and first-query examples for one pack'). It distinguishes this tool from get_catalog by emphasizing 'one pack' rather than the overall catalog. The purpose is immediately understandable.
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 description explicitly says to call this tool before querying a new pack, giving a clear context of use. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the guidance is strong enough to direct an agent's behavior.
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 clear, distinct purpose: get_catalog lists available packs, get_pack provides metadata for a specific pack, and resolve_point performs reverse geocoding. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with underscores (get_catalog, get_pack, resolve_point). The naming style is uniform and predictable.
With only 3 tools, the server is tightly scoped for its stated purpose of reverse geocoding with discovery support. This is within the ideal range and avoids unnecessary bloat.
The server covers the full workflow needed for its purpose: discovering available packs, inspecting pack details, and resolving coordinates to loc_id chains. The referenced external tools (e.g., loc_id_info, get_geometry) are clearly extensions beyond this server's scope.