ShowMeOnMap

Report a blocker (agent feedback)

report_blocker

Read-onlyIdempotent

Tell the ShowMeOnMap team your agent hit something it could not accomplish — an unsupported intent, a missing tool, an unclear schema, an op that failed in a confusing way. Use this when build_map / mutate_map / a direct-op tool returns something you cannot recover from, OR when you would have wanted a different tool to exist. Records the report to a server-side log; does not unblock the current session, but feeds future capability work. No map_id required — file the report even if no map was built.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`map_id`	No	Optional. The map_id you were working on, if any.
`rationale`	Yes	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.
`what_i_tried`	Yes	Which tools / inputs you attempted, in order. Be specific — tool name + key arg shape is ideal.
`what_i_was_trying`	Yes	High-level intent in one or two sentences. e.g. "merge two filtered choropleths into a fused bivariate map".
`where_i_got_stuck`	Yes	The specific failure: what came back, what was missing, why you could not proceed.
`suggested_capability`	No	Optional. A new tool, op, or schema field that would have unblocked you.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/destructive/idempotent hints; the description adds meaningful behavioral context: records to a server-side log, feeds future capability work, requires no map_id, and does not alter current state. It even clarifies that rationale labels are stored for traceability. 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

Five sentences, each earning its place: purpose, trigger conditions, side-effect, non-blocking caveat, and map_id optionality. Front-loaded with the verb 'Tell', and the structured use of em-dashes keeps it readable without redundancy.

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 feedback/logging tool with strong annotations and fully described schema, the description covers the essential context: when to use, what happens, what does not happen, and parameter flexibility. No output schema needed for a simple acknowledge-and-log tool.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds a small but useful parameter-level clarification: 'No map_id required — file the report even if no map was built.' This reinforces an optionality detail that is more actionable than the schema's bare 'Optional' label.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Tell the ShowMeOnMap team your agent hit something it could not accomplish.' It clearly defines the tool's scope (unsupported intent, missing tool, confusing schema, unrecoverable op failure) and distinguishes it from map-building/editing siblings by framing it as feedback rather than a map operation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use: when build_map / mutate_map / a direct-op tool returns something unrecoverable, or when a different tool would have been wanted. It also says what it does NOT do ('does not unblock the current session'), which manages expectations and prevents misuse.

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

All ShowMeOnMap 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

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but a few pairs such as select_within/focus_area and correlate_layers/add_fusion_layer overlap in function, differing mainly by input type or output (read vs. write). The descriptions adequately explain these differences, so agents can distinguish them with careful reading.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names consistently follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (add_layer, filter_layer, export_image, remove_annotation). Minor exceptions like undo/redo/tag are conventional single verbs and do not detract from the overall predictability.

Tool Count4/5

At 25 tools, the server is on the heavy side, but each tool serves a distinct operation in a comprehensive mapping workspace—covering creation, editing, analysis, export, and history. The number feels justified by the broad feature set rather than excessive.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers the full lifecycle of layers and workspace state, including add/remove/rename/restyle/filter, build/get/mutate/undo/redo, export, and tagging. Minor gaps such as annotation editing, layer reordering, or direct data updates exist, but they are not critical blockers for typical workflows.

Resources

Need Help?