catastro
Server Details
Catastro espanol en JSON limpio: inmuebles por referencia catastral, coordenadas o direccion.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.2/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.
Each tool accepts a distinct input type (cadastral reference, coordinates, address) to retrieve the same property data, so there is no ambiguity about which to use for a given query.
All tool names follow a consistent Spanish verb_noun pattern: 'consultar_inmueble_' followed by a unique differentiator ('catastro', 'por_coordenadas', 'por_direccion'), making the pattern predictable.
Three tools cover the primary ways to look up Spanish cadastral information (by reference, coordinates, or address), which is well-scoped for the server's purpose without unnecessary extras.
The set covers the main query methods for non-protected cadastral data; a minor gap might be the absence of a bulk lookup or by cadastral parcel map, but for typical use it is largely complete.
Available Tools
3 toolsconsultar_inmueble_catastroConsultar inmueble del Catastro espanolARead-onlyInspect
Devuelve datos catastrales no protegidos de un inmueble espanol a partir de su referencia catastral: clase (urbano/rustico), uso principal, superficie construida (m2), anio de construccion, direccion normalizada y desglose de construcciones (urbano) o cultivos (rustico). Traduce el servicio SOAP/XML de la Direccion General del Catastro (OVC) a JSON denso. Acepta referencias de 14/18/20 caracteres; si la de 14 (parcela) resuelve a varios inmuebles, devuelve la lista de candidatos para desambiguar.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| referenciaCatastral | Yes | Referencia catastral espanola de 14 (parcela), 18 o 20 (inmueble) caracteres alfanumericos. Ejemplo: 9872023VH5797S0001WX |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| source | Yes | |
| status | Yes | |
| message | Yes | |
| property | Yes | |
| candidates | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Adds context beyond annotations: translates SOAP/XML to JSON, handles multiple candidates for 14-char references. No contradiction with readOnlyHint and openWorldHint.
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?
Single sentence front-loads purpose, then adds necessary details efficiently. Every sentence adds value.
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?
Covers input constraints, output data fields, source translation, and disambiguation scenario. Output schema exists, so no need to document return values.
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 covers 100% of parameter with description; description adds details about different lengths and disambiguation behavior, but no new parameter semantics.
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?
Clearly states verb (Devuelve), resource (datos catastrales no protegidos), and input (referencia catastral). Differentiates from siblings by specifying the lookup method.
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?
Implies usage when a referencia catastral is available, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over coordinate or address-based siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
consultar_inmueble_por_coordenadasConsultar inmueble del Catastro espanol por coordenadasARead-onlyInspect
Resuelve y devuelve los datos catastrales no protegidos de un inmueble espanol a partir de unas coordenadas geograficas (latitud/longitud). Util para resolver el inmueble desde un punto de un mapa cuando no se tiene la referencia catastral. SRS soportados: EPSG:4326 (WGS84, por defecto) y EPSG:4258 (ETRS89). Devuelve el MISMO JSON normalizado que la consulta por referencia catastral (clase urbano/rustico, uso, superficie construida, anio, direccion); si el punto cae en una parcela con varios inmuebles, devuelve la lista de candidatos. Cobertura: territorio comun (excluye Pais Vasco y Navarra).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lat | Yes | Latitud en grados decimales (WGS84/ETRS89). Rango -90..90. Ej: 41.3915 | |
| lon | Yes | Longitud en grados decimales (WGS84/ETRS89). Rango -180..180. Ej: 2.1620 | |
| srs | No | Codigo EPSG del sistema de referencia. Soportados: EPSG:4326 (WGS84, por defecto) y EPSG:4258 (ETRS89). |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| source | Yes | |
| status | Yes | |
| message | Yes | |
| property | Yes | |
| candidates | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds value by specifying that the output is the same normalized JSON as the reference query and that multiple candidates are returned for parcels with multiple properties. No contradiction with annotations.
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 front-load the purpose and key details. Every sentence earns its place with no waste. Efficient and clear.
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?
Given the tool's complexity (3 parameters, output schema exists, good annotations), the description covers purpose, behavior, return format, SRS, and territorial coverage completely. No gaps noted.
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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents parameters. The description reinforces SRS support but adds minimal new meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., ranging in schema). 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 clearly states it resolves and returns non-protected cadastral data from coordinates, with the verb 'resuelve y devuelve'. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying coordinate-based input, contrasting with reference or address queries.
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?
Provides clear context: useful when cadastral reference is unknown and coordinates are available. Mentions supported SRS and territorial coverage (excludes Basque Country and Navarre). However, no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool names are given beyond the sibling list.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
consultar_inmueble_por_direccionConsultar inmueble del Catastro espanol por direccionARead-onlyInspect
Resuelve y devuelve los datos catastrales no protegidos de un inmueble urbano espanol a partir de su DIRECCION (provincia, municipio, via y numero). Util para resolver el inmueble desde el texto de un anuncio cuando no se tiene la referencia catastral. Provincia y municipio van por NOMBRE (no codigo); streetType es la sigla de la via (CL, AV, PZ...) y se recomienda para acertar. Devuelve el MISMO JSON normalizado que la consulta por referencia (clase urbano/rustico, uso, superficie construida, anio, direccion); si el numero corresponde a varios inmuebles (propiedad horizontal), devuelve la lista de candidatos para desambiguar (afina con bloque/escalera/planta/puerta). Solo direcciones urbanas; cobertura: territorio comun (excluye Pais Vasco y Navarra).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| door | No | Puerta, si aplica. Opcional: afina a un inmueble concreto. | |
| block | No | Bloque, si aplica (propiedad horizontal). Opcional: afina a un inmueble concreto. | |
| floor | No | Planta, si aplica. Opcional: afina a un inmueble concreto. | |
| province | Yes | Provincia por NOMBRE (no codigo), p. ej. 'CIUDAD REAL', 'MADRID'. Obligatorio. Territorio comun (excluye Pais Vasco y Navarra). | |
| stairway | No | Escalera, si aplica. Opcional: afina a un inmueble concreto. | |
| streetName | Yes | Nombre de la via SIN la sigla, p. ej. 'GLORIA', 'ALCALA'. Obligatorio. | |
| streetType | No | Tipo/sigla de via del Catastro: CL (calle), AV (avenida), PZ (plaza), CR (carretera), CM (camino)... Opcional pero recomendado para acertar la via. | |
| municipality | Yes | Municipio por NOMBRE, p. ej. 'SANTA CRUZ DE MUDELA', 'MADRID'. Obligatorio. | |
| streetNumber | Yes | Numero de policia, p. ej. '51'. Obligatorio. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| source | Yes | |
| status | Yes | |
| message | Yes | |
| property | Yes | |
| candidates | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds value beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint) by explaining the normalized JSON output format, the disambiguation behavior for multiple candidates (horizontal property), and that it only works for urban addresses. No contradiction with annotations.
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 a single paragraph that front-loads the purpose. It is reasonably concise, though some information is repeated (e.g., province/municipality by name appears in both description and param descriptions). Could be slightly more structured, but overall efficient.
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?
Given the complexity (9 parameters, 4 required) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the core behavior: address resolution, output format, disambiguation, and coverage. It is missing explicit error handling or rate limits, but it's sufficient for an agent to use correctly.
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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning: explains that province/municipality are by name, streetType is an abbreviation, and optional parameters help disambiguate. This extra context justifies a score of 4.
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 clearly states that it resolves non-protected cadastral data for a Spanish urban property from an address. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (by reference and by coordinates) by specifying the address-based lookup method.
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 provides context: useful when cadastral reference is unknown, recommends using streetType, explains that province and municipality are by name, and mentions coverage (urban addresses, excludes Basque Country and Navarre). It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the coverage and sibling tools imply it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!