Skip to main content
Glama

get_poi_details

Read-only

POI-Detail-Lookup per OSM-ID (Daten aus OpenStreetMap). Für „Öffnungszeiten von X", „erzähl mir was über X" ist dieses Werkzeug die Auskunft — erst verorten, dann abfragen: die osm_id stammt aus nearby/resolve_location/search_place. When to use: nach nearby / resolve_location / search_place lieferte einen POI mit osm_id und die Anfrage will Detail-Info — DE: „erzähl mir was über ", „was kostet der Eintritt", „Öffnungszeiten von ", „bei dem Wetter in unternehmen". EN: „tell me about ", „opening hours of ", „what can I do in given the weather". When NOT to use: für Stadt-/Region-IDs (nutze search_place); ohne vorherigen Tool-Call mit OSM-ID-Output (KEIN raten); wenn die Anfrage Routing/Abfahrten will (dafür der Server MobilityMCP). Required args: osm_id — bare numeric string (pattern ^\d+$, z.B. "296222553"), kein node:/way:-Prefix (der wurde beim emittierenden Tool bereits gestrippt). Typical chain: TWO distinct chains feed this tool — (1) WETTER-CONTEXT: get_current_weather + nearby(node_types='poi') → THIS_TOOL ×3-5 (Trigger: „bei dem Wetter", „given the weather"). (2) REGION-TOURISM: search_place + resolve_location(node_types='poi') → THIS_TOOL ×3-5 (Trigger: „was kann ich in unternehmen" ohne Wetter-Bezug — dichtere OSM-Coverage über resolve_location). Multi-call: JA. Nach resolve_location/nearby mit N POI-Treffern: THIS_TOOL pro Top-3 bis Top-5 OSM-IDs PARALLEL aufrufen — jeder Call ist unabhängig, ein Burst ist erlaubt. NIE nur 1× rufen wenn N>1 POIs zurückkommen. Anti-Fab note: POI-Name, Operator, Öffnungszeiten, Adresse, Tags kommen AUSSCHLIESSLICH aus sources[].subjects[].properties dieses Aufrufs. sources: [] heißt: zu diesem Ort ist nichts abrufbar — so wiedergeben („Zu diesem Ort konnte ich aktuell keine Detail-Informationen abrufen"). OSM-Coverage: deutschlandweit; Tag-Dichte variiert je Region wie in OSM üblich. Shape: {osm_id, sources:[{source:'openstreetmap', subjects:[{subject, properties:{…raw OSM tags: name, tourism/historic/leisure, opening_hours, fee, website, wheelchair, addr:*…}, coord?:{lat,lon}}]}], facts?:{opening_hours?:{value,source}, price?:{free?,raw,source}}}. Die rohen Tags tragen Typ/Adresse/Öffnungszeiten/Preis/Beschreibung bereits; coord (Geometrie-Center, additiv) liegt je Subject NEBEN properties und speist die Karte — present nur wenn das Element Geometrie hat. facts (additiv, top-level): normalisierte Öffnungszeiten + Preis mit Pro-Feld-Provenance (source:'openstreetmap') aus den opening_hours/fee-Tags — EINE stabile Stelle statt Roh-Tags durchwühlen. price.free=true bei fee=no (explizit „kostenlos"/Eintritt frei), false bei fee=yes/Betrag; price.raw trägt den Roh-Tag verbatim. Fehlt opening_hours UND fee → facts ABWESEND (honest, nie erfunden — Quellen-Priorität: kuratiert via get_tourism_details VOR diesem OSM-Bridge). attribution (additiv, top-level): die ODbL-Namensnennung der gelieferten OSM-Daten (ODbL) — {id:'ODbL-1.0', notice:'© OpenStreetMap contributors', url:'https://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright'}. EINMAL pro Antwort (nicht pro Treffer) und nur wenn sources nicht leer ist. Nennst du OSM-Daten in der Antwort, nenne die Quelle „OpenStreetMap" — die Lizenz-Auflage reist mit dem Tool-Output, nicht mit dem Prompt.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
osm_idYesBare numeric OSM ID (e.g. `"296222553"` — no `node:` / `way:` prefix). Must match `^\d+$` (validated at handler-time). The mcp-linking / mcp-geo callers already strip any type-prefix before exposing the value in `ids[].value`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With readOnlyHint/openWorldHint already declared, the description still adds substantial behavior: multi-call bursts of 3-5 parallel calls, `sources: []` meaning 'nothing retrievable', absence of `facts` as an honest signal, ODbL attribution rules, and per-field provenance. It also flags OSM's variable tag coverage.

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?

Bold section headers and front-loaded purpose make a long description navigable, and each block (chains, shape, attribution) carries distinct information. It is verbose and repeats the no-prefix rule, but the density is justified by the tool's many edges.

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, the description fully specifies the response shape (`sources`/`subjects`/`properties`/`coord`, additive `facts`), the attribution envelope, and the anti-fabrication policy. An agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

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 the format is already documented, but the description adds the provenance of `osm_id` (comes from `nearby`/`resolve_location`/`search_place` output, prefix already stripped) which the schema only partially implies. That is genuine value beyond the schema, though the format itself is redundant.

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 opening states a specific verb+resource ('POI-Detail-Lookup per OSM-ID') and immediately scopes it to OpenStreetMap data. It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings, e.g. 'für Stadt-/Region-IDs (nutze search_place)' and the curated 'get_tourism_details' source.

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?

There are explicit **When to use** and **When NOT to use** sections with concrete DE/EN trigger phrases, plus named alternatives for the excluded cases (search_place for region IDs, MobilityMCP for routing, get_tourism_details as curated priority).

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources