FCC Broadband Map

get_broadband_by_location

Get broadband providers and availability at a specific lat/lon location.

Returns a list of broadband providers serving the location with their
advertised download/upload speeds and technology types. Includes BEAD
classification (unserved/underserved/served) based on max available speeds.

NOTE: The FCC Broadband Map API has bot protection and may reject requests.
If you get an error, the API endpoint may have changed. The FCC updates
this API frequently without notice.

Args:
    latitude: Location latitude (e.g. 38.8977 for Washington DC).
    longitude: Location longitude (e.g. -77.0365 for Washington DC).
    technology_code: Filter by technology (0=All, 10=Copper, 40=Cable,
                    50=Fiber, 60=Satellite, 70=Fixed Wireless).
    speed_download: Minimum download speed in Mbps (default 25).
    speed_upload: Minimum upload speed in Mbps (default 3).
    as_of_date: BDC filing date in YYYY-MM-DD format (default 2024-06-30).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`latitude`	Yes
`longitude`	Yes
`as_of_date`	No	2024-06-30
`speed_upload`	No
`speed_download`	No
`technology_code`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations, so description provides good disclosure: it's a read operation, returns a list, and warns about external API fragility. Lacks explicit statement about read-only or auth needs.

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?

Well-structured with general description, note, and args. Slightly lengthy but all sentences add value. Front-loaded with purpose.

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?

With no annotations, the description covers all 6 parameters, explains return values (speeds, tech, BEAD), and includes crucial context about FCC API volatility. Output schema exists, so return details are not needed.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, but description includes an 'Args:' section explaining each parameter with examples, defaults, and valid values (e.g., technology_code enum). Fully compensates.

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 description clearly states it gets broadband providers at a specific lat/lon, with specific returns (speeds, technology, BEAD). It distinguishes from siblings that are summaries by county/state.

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?

Implies use for point locations, and includes an important note about FCC API bot protection and changes. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or direct comparison to siblings.

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

All FCC Broadband Map tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct scope: location point, county, state, and providers in county. There is no overlap in purpose, and descriptions clearly differentiate them.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow the pattern 'get_<object>_by_<scope>' (e.g., get_broadband_by_location, get_providers_by_county). The naming is consistent and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

With 4 tools, the server covers the essential query types for broadband data (location, county summary, state summary, provider list). The count is well-scoped without being excessive.

Completeness4/5

The set covers the main use cases for querying FCC broadband data. Minor gaps exist, such as no batch or multi-location query, but core CRUD-like operations are present for a read-only API.

Resources

Need Help?