Clipform

Fetch Geographic Boundary

clipform_fetch_boundary

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a GeoJSON boundary polygon for a country, city, or region. Returns simplified GeoJSON ready to use as the 'boundary' prop in the Map composition.

mainlandOnly excludes small islands and overseas territories (e.g. Corsica for France, Hawaii for USA).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`type`	No	Type of place to search for	country
`query`	Yes	Place name (e.g. 'France', 'Paris', 'Tokyo', 'Brazil')
`context`	Yes	Describe the user's underlying goal in one sentence - not the tool you're calling.
`maxPoints`	No	Maximum points per polygon ring for simplification (default 500, lower = smaller payload)
`mainlandOnly`	No	Keep only the largest landmass, excluding small islands and overseas territories

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Resolved place name
`geojson`	Yes	The Feature GeoJSON as a JSON string - use as the boundary prop in the Map composition
`size_kb`	Yes	Approximate size of the returned GeoJSON in KB
`geometry_type`	Yes
`mainland_only`	Yes

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. Beyond that, the description adds useful behavioral context: the returned GeoJSON is simplified, and mainlandOnly excludes small islands/overseas territories with concrete examples (Corsica, Hawaii). No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and efficient, leading with the core action and output format, then providing one high-value param clarification. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundant restatement of the title.

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?

For a read-only boundary fetch with 100% schema coverage, rich annotations, and an output schema present, the description is complete. It covers the output format, its intended use, and the one nuanced parameter. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning to mainlandOnly with concrete examples that clarify the parameter's effect for different countries. Other parameters are well-documented in the schema and need no additional explanation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') with a specific resource ('GeoJSON boundary polygon') and names the supported place types (country, city, region). It also states the intended downstream use ('boundary' prop in the Map composition), which distinguishes it from all sibling tools.

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 clearly identifies the context for using this tool: preparing a boundary polygon for a Map composition. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but no sibling tool offers similar boundary-fetching functionality, so the use case is sufficiently clear.

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

All Clipform tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Most form/node CRUD tools are clearly distinct, but the render/generate trio (generate_video, render_video_template, render_composition) and get_responses vs get_results can be confused by name alone. The descriptions include strong disambiguation guidance, so the overlap is manageable but still present.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a consistent clipform_verb_noun snake_case pattern, with create/get/update/delete/list used predictably. Minor deviations include get_more_tools lacking the clipform_ prefix and whoami not matching the verb_noun convention.

Tool Count2/5

At 34 tools, this is above the range where a toolset feels well-scoped, and several entries are auxiliary or internal (whoami, log_generation, get_more_tools, search_news). The domain is broad, but the surface could be consolidated without losing core capabilities.

Completeness4/5

The set covers form and node lifecycle, media upload/attachment, logic wiring, publishing, responses/results, and content generation (TTS, video, music, stock media). Minor gaps remain, such as no conditional branching in set_logic and no general media-library listing tool.

Fetch Geographic Boundary

Input Schema

Output Schema

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

TDQS

Resources