Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Malaysia Land Lots & Local Plan Zoning

by io.github.BumiAtlas
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get Malaysian local-plan zoning

MY_zoning_get
Read-onlyIdempotent

Local-plan land-use zoning (Rancangan Tempatan, PLANMalaysia) at a location in Malaysia, or one zone by id. Pass query as 'latitude, longitude' (e.g. 1.4927, 103.7414), or id. Each zone has id, negeri and negeriName, gunatanah (land use in Malay: Perumahan, Komersial, Industri, Pertanian, …) with gunatanahEn (English), kod (land-use code: class prefix + sub-class digits, e.g. TRM203 housing, PT103 farming), status (Sediada existing, Komited committed: approved but not built, Cadangan proposed by the plan), rancangan (the local plan, e.g. 'RT Daerah Kota Tinggi'), pbt (local authority), tahun (data year), luasHektar (zone area recorded in the plan, hectares), and lot, daerah, mukim and seksyen as the plan writes them (names or bare numbers, not codes). Empty fields are left out. Zoning is loaded for some states only; an empty result means no plan is loaded there, not that the land is unzoned. Where plans overlap, more than one zone is returned, smallest first.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "MY_zoning_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoZone id, e.g. 01-325186
queryNo'latitude, longitude'
include_geometryNoInclude each zone's boundary as a GeoJSON MultiPolygon

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: it explains that empty results mean no plan is loaded for that state rather than 'unzoned', that overlapping plans return multiple zones ordered smallest first, and that empty fields are omitted. These are exactly the non-obvious behaviors an agent could misread.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and lookup modes, then the return-field glossary. It is dense and long, but nearly every clause carries information the agent needs, especially since there is no output schema.

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 and no required parameters, the description fully carries the burden: it enumerates every returned field and its meaning, explains Malay land-use values and kod prefixes, and covers the edge cases of unloaded states and overlapping plans.

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 the schema already documents id, query, and include_geometry. The description adds only the coordinate example and reaffirms the 'latitude, longitude' format; include_geometry is not elaborated beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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/resource: local-plan land-use zoning (Rancangan Tempatan, PLANMalaysia) looked up either by coordinate or zone id. This is unmistakably distinct from the sibling MY_lot_* tools, which deal with lots rather than zoning polygons.

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?

The description makes the two invocation modes explicit ('Pass query as latitude, longitude ... or id'), which is the core routing decision. It doesn't explicitly say when to prefer zoning over the sibling lot tools, but the resource difference makes that mostly self-evident.

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

All Malaysia Land Lots & Local Plan Zoning 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