Qatar Land Parcels & PIN Lookup (قطع الأراضي)

Search Qatari land parcels

QA_parcel_search

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find Qatari land parcels (Ministry of Municipality cadastre) by PIN, zone and block, or location, with each parcel's whole record. query takes an 8-digit PIN (70155302; an older cadastral key works too), a zone and block ('zone 70 block 15', '70/15', or the QARS reference 7015), a whole zone ('zone 70'), or coordinates as 'latitude, longitude' (e.g. 25.2854, 51.5310). With coordinates it returns parcels containing the point (distance 0), then the nearest within radius metres, closest first. A zone or block lists its parcels in PIN order with the total; page with offset. Each parcel has pin, zone, block, buildingHeight (permitted floors, e.g. G+1+P), area (registered, m²), mapArea (m², from the outline), registered (date), ended (cancelled parcels), surveyJob, cdstKey where it differs, and bbox. Set include_geometry for each boundary as GeoJSON (keep limit small). Use QA_parcel_image to see a parcel and its neighbours.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "QA_parcel_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum results
`query`	Yes	PIN (8 digits), 'zone 70 block 15', QARS (7015), or 'latitude, longitude'
`offset`	No	Skip this many parcels of a zone or block, to page through them
`radius`	No	Search radius in metres around coordinates
`include_geometry`	No	Include each boundary as a GeoJSON MultiPolygon

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, yet the description adds genuinely new behavior: ordering (distance 0 first, then nearest within radius, closest first; PIN order for zone/block), totals returned, paging semantics, and a cost warning to keep limit small when include_geometry is set. This is real operational context beyond the 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?

Front-loaded with the resource and accepted key forms, then flows into per-mode return behavior and finally field inventory. It is a single dense paragraph rather than a wall of prose, but the query-form examples duplicate the schema and the trailing field list is long.

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 compensates by enumerating the returned fields (pin, zone, block, buildingHeight, area, mapArea, registered, ended, surveyJob, cdstKey, bbox) and their units, plus the GeoJSON option. For a 5-parameter search tool this covers everything an agent needs to call it and interpret results.

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 baseline is 3; the description earns extra by explaining what each parameter *does* conditionally — radius only matters for coordinate queries, offset only for zone/block paging, include_geometry triggers a size tradeoff. The query examples largely restate the schema's own description, which keeps it from a 5.

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 and resource ("Find Qatari land parcels ... Ministry of Municipality cadastre") plus the accepted key types, which immediately distinguishes it from the sibling QA_parcel_image. An agent can tell what it retrieves and by what identifiers without opening the schema.

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?

Gives concrete routing: which query shapes select which mode, how coordinate searches escalate from containing-parcel to radius search, that paging via offset applies to zone/block listings, and closes with an explicit alternative ("Use QA_parcel_image to see a parcel and its neighbours"). Little is left to inference.

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

All Qatar Land Parcels & PIN Lookup (قطع الأراضي) tools Inspect

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.