Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Listing Location Toolkit

by io.github.Nero-Engine
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Map and aerial image links

map_image
Read-onlyIdempotent

Links for a listing map: a US aerial photo of the site as a PNG (USGS National Map imagery, public domain, any width from 100 m to 5 km), a USGS topo map PNG, and Google Maps and OpenStreetMap links. In the UK only the map links are returned for now. Instant, no outside calls.

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": "map_image"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latNoLatitude in decimal degrees (use with lon instead of address).
lonNoLongitude in decimal degrees.
pixelsNoImage width in pixels. Default 1200, max 2400.
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.
width_mNoGround width of the image in metres. Default 500, 100 to 5000.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world behavior. The description still adds real value beyond them: the imagery is public domain, the ground width spans 100 m to 5 km, UK requests return only map links, and the call is instant. 'No outside calls' is slightly at odds with openWorldHint=true, but it plausibly refers to no billable/API round-trip rather than a true contradiction.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, then scope limits, then latency. The first sentence is dense with appositives but every clause carries information. Minor trimming of the parenthetical source attribution would improve it.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a read-only URL-builder with no output schema and fully documented parameters, the description covers outputs, coverage limits, and latency — enough to call it correctly. It leaves unstated how the two PNG links versus the two map links are returned/structured, which is the main remaining gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so every parameter already carries its own description and defaults. The description's mention of the 100 m–5 km width range only restates the width_m schema text and adds no new guidance on coordinate versus address precedence or pixel defaults, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 the exact outputs: a USGS aerial PNG, a USGS topo PNG, and Google Maps/OpenStreetMap links, plus the geographic scope (US vs UK). That is a specific resource with concrete deliverables. It stops short of naming any sibling (e.g. listing_location_pack) to differentiate itself, which keeps it off a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer 'use this when you need map or aerial image links for a listing'. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusion against sibling tools that also return location data, and no note on when to pass lat/lon versus address beyond the schema's own text.

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