Skip to main content
Glama

ShowMeOnMap

by com.showmeonmap
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Focus a layer on a named area

focus_area

Refine an existing layer to a NAMED area the server resolves from OpenStreetMap — a street corridor ("Broadway from Arbutus Street to Main Street"), a place ("Mount Pleasant"), or an intersection surroundings. Pass names only, never coordinates; unresolvable names return a clarification with real nearby candidates instead of guessed geometry. Emits ordinary undoable ops (filter / new layer + camera) and a grounded summary like "kept 37 of 150 features". Costs 1 credit when a mutation lands; clarifications are refunded.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNofilter (default): hide features outside, reversible. select: copy matches into a new layer. clip: new layer with geometry trimmed at the boundary.
map_idYes
areaRefYes
layerIdYes
rationaleNoOptional short label (≤300 chars) for the map edit history, e.g. "add wildfire layer". Omit it to send nothing beyond the tool arguments.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / rationale / description
      Previous value: -"Short audit-log label (≤300 chars) stating the user-facing goal this call serves, e.g. \"add wildfire layer for the user's California query\". Required on every call. Stored in the operations log so map edits stay traceable — we never see your chat history."New value: +"Optional short label (≤300 chars) for the map edit history, e.g. \"add wildfire layer\". Omit it to send nothing beyond the tool arguments."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "map_id",
-  "layerId",
-  "areaRef",
-  "rationale"
-]New value: +[
+  "map_id",
+  "layerId",
+  "areaRef"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial context beyond annotations: emits undoable ops (filter / new layer + camera), produces a grounded summary, costs 1 credit on successful mutation, and refunds clarifications. Clarifies that failure returns candidate names rather than guessed geometry. Annotations already cover safety, but this enriches the operational picture.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and key constraint, then behavior, then cost. Every sentence adds distinct value with no repetition.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, key parameter semantics, error handling, reversibility, cost, and output format. The only minor gap is not restating mode option differences, which the schema already documents.

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 only 40%, so the description must compensate. It explains the core areaRef parameter well (three kinds, names not coordinates, examples) but does not cover mode options, bufferMeters, radiusMeters, or map_id/layerId semantics beyond the schema. Partial compensation.

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?

States a specific verb (refine), resource (layer), and scope (named area resolved from OSM), with examples and a clear boundary: names only, never coordinates. This distinguishes it from coordinate-based siblings like select_within, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Gives a hard usage rule ('Pass names only, never coordinates') and explains behavior for unresolvable names, which frames when the tool applies. However, it does not name alternative sibling tools or explicitly state when to choose this over filter_layer or select_within.

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

All ShowMeOnMap toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources