Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Telesherpa Ontology Platform

by com.telesherpa
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Map Interface Markers

onto_interface_map_markers
Read-onlyIdempotent

Die Kartenmarker eines Interfaces abrufen (Objekte mit Koordinaten zur Anzeige auf der Karte). Rein lesend, ruft keine Kartendaten extern ab. Nutze es fuer Karten-/Karten-Ansichten; fehlende Koordinaten erst mit onto_object_geocode setzen. Die identische Antwort liefert ontouser_interface_map_markers. | EN: onto, interface, map, markers

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bboxYesKartenausschnitt minLng,minLat,maxLng,maxLat (Pflicht, der Endpunkt filtert darauf)
nameYesInterface-Name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / bbox
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Kartenausschnitt minLng,minLat,maxLng,maxLat (Pflicht, der Endpunkt filtert darauf)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / interface
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Interface-Name",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / name
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Interface-Name",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / type
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Objekttyp",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[]New value: +[
+  "name",
+  "bbox"
+]
  2. Added
  3. Removed
  4. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces this by saying the operation is read-only and does not fetch external map data, but it adds little beyond the annotations and omits auth, rate-limit, or pagination context.

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?

The German description is front-loaded and efficient, with purpose first and usage/prerequisite guidance after. The appended EN keyword line and repeated 'Karten-/Karten-Ansichten' are slightly redundant but do not obscure the main instruction.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter read-only tool with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the description supplies enough context: what it returns conceptually, that it is read-only, that no external map data is fetched, and that geocoding may be needed first. The unresolved choice between this tool and the identically responding sibling keeps it from being fully complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both name and bbox are already documented in the schema. The description does not add syntax or filtering semantics beyond what the schema provides; it only mentions that missing coordinates should be geocoded first.

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 states a specific verb and resource: retrieving map markers for an interface, described as objects with coordinates for map display. It distinguishes the tool from onto_object_geocode by making geocoding a prerequisite for missing coordinates, and it identifies the duplicate ontouser_interface_map_markers sibling.

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?

It gives clear usage context: use it for map/map views, and set missing coordinates with onto_object_geocode first. It does not explain when to choose this tool over the identically responding ontouser_interface_map_markers sibling, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All Telesherpa Ontology Platform 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