Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Listing Location Toolkit

by io.github.Nero-Engine
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Full location pack for a listing

listing_location_pack
Read-onlyIdempotent

Everything for one address in one call: drive times to the nearest town, cities and airports; people living within a 1, 2 and 4 hour drive (US Census 2020 or WorldPop 2020 UK); nearby lakes, rivers, coast, mountains, national parks and attractions with distances and drive minutes; waterfront and inside-a-national-park checks; the mapped site outline and its size in acres and hectares; and map links (US aerial photo). Returns listing_lines (short sentences to paste into a listing), the raw numbers, and sources with licences. Takes 10 to 25 seconds.

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": "listing_location_pack"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latNoLatitude in decimal degrees (use with lon instead of address).
lonNoLongitude in decimal degrees.
hoursNoDrive bands in hours for the people count. Default [1, 2, 4]. Up to 4 bands, each 0.25 to 5.
addressNoStreet address with town and ZIP or postcode, e.g. "7090 State Highway 80, Cooperstown, NY 13326" or "Ambleside LA22 9BB". Not needed when lat and lon are given.
countryNoOptional hint for the address lookup.
destinationsNoOptional extra places to time, as names ("Albany, NY") or {name, lat, lon}. Up to 6.
radius_milesNoHow far to look for nature and attractions. Default 20, max 40.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety and openness (readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds genuinely new behavioral facts: the 10–25 second latency, the upstream data sources and vintages (Census 2020, WorldPop 2020), and the return composition (listing_lines plus raw numbers plus sources with licences). The parenthetical "US aerial photo" also hints at a country-dependent output difference. It does not cover failure behavior for unresolvable addresses.

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-loads the value proposition ("Everything for one address in one call") and then packs the component list densely with no filler or marketing language. It is a single semicolon-chained sentence, though, and the latency figure would be more useful placed near the front where the cost decision is made.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description does a reasonable job enumerating what comes back and citing sources and licences. Gaps remain for a 7-parameter, open-world tool: no mention of error/fallback behavior when an address cannot be geocoded, and no clarity on whether map links or licence sources differ for UK addresses.

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 every parameter is already documented, including defaults and limits for hours, destinations and radius_miles. The description only echoes the default 1/2/4-hour bands and adds that data source varies by country (US Census vs WorldPop UK), which is modest added value over the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a concrete deliverable — a full location pack for one address in a single call — and enumerates the components (drive times, population bands, nature/attractions, acreage, map links). This clearly separates it from narrower siblings like drive_times, nearby_nature and plot_size, which each return a subset, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

"Everything for one address in one call" plus the stated 10–25 second runtime implicitly signals this is the comprehensive/slow option versus cheaper focused tools. However, it never states when NOT to use it or which sibling to pick when only one component is needed, leaving the tradeoff to inference.

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

All Listing Location Toolkit 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