Maps by DeltaBreen

reverse_geocode

Read-only

Reverse geocoding: what is at a point, as GeoJSON features: the nearest address or business, the street, and the division that contains it (with boundary_id for its outline), each with its context (place, region, country). Nothing when the point is off the map. Counts one lookup against the workspace's monthly searches, on every plan; past the plan it returns searches_exhausted and nothing is charged. Show the returned attribution with the results.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "lng": "<lng>",
      "lat": "<lat>"
    },
    "name": "reverse_geocode"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lat`	Yes	Latitude, -90 to 90.
`lng`	Yes	Longitude, -180 to 180.
`key_id`	No	The map key (uuid from list_keys) to count the lookup against. Default: the workspace's first active secret key, else its first publishable one.
`language`	No	Language for names, e.g. "en", "de", "es".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations: it discloses the billing model (one lookup against the workspace's monthly searches on every plan), the failure mode past quota (searches_exhausted returned, nothing charged), the empty-result case for off-map points, and an attribution display obligation. These are exactly the operational traits an agent cannot get from structured fields.

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?

Dense and front-loaded: purpose first, then return shape, then edge cases, then billing, then the attribution directive. Slightly run-on with heavy colon/semicolon chaining, but no sentence is filler.

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 output schema available, the description carries the return-value burden and does so: feature types, boundary_id for outlines, nested context objects, empty-result behavior, and the searches_exhausted error. Combined with the annotations, an agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the result.

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 lat, lng, key_id, and language are already documented inline, and no enums exist to clarify. The description adds only indirect context for key_id by mentioning that the lookup is counted against the workspace's monthly searches; it says nothing about language selection or coordinate validation.

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 (reverse geocoding) and resource (a point), then enumerates exactly what comes back: nearest address or business, street, containing division with boundary_id, plus context. That enumeration distinguishes it from sibling lookup tools like search_places and pois_nearby without needing their schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Use is implied by the coordinate-based framing and the note that it returns nothing when the point is off the map, but the description never names alternatives (search_places, pois_nearby, poi_details) or states when to pick this over them. The agent must infer the coordinate-vs-query distinction.

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

All Maps by DeltaBreen tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?