Listing Location Toolkit

Site or plot size

plot_size

Read-onlyIdempotent

Area of a site in acres, hectares, square feet and square metres, plus its perimeter. Pass a polygon (from a county parcel map, a deed plan or a drawing) for an exact figure, or just an address or lat and lon to measure the OpenStreetMap outline of the place at that point (for example a campground, marina or hotel grounds). An OpenStreetMap outline is not a legal boundary: say "about" and check it against the deed.

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": "plot_size"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lat`	No	Latitude in decimal degrees (use with lon instead of address).
`lon`	No	Longitude in decimal degrees.
`address`	No	Street 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.
`country`	No	Optional hint for the address lookup.
`polygon`	No	Optional. A GeoJSON Polygon or MultiPolygon (or a Feature holding one), or a plain list of [lon, lat] points. Up to 5,000 points.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the description correctly spends its space elsewhere: data provenance (OpenStreetMap), accuracy limitations versus a deed, and even recommended phrasing (say "about"). It does not say what happens when no OSM outline exists at the given point, which is the one behavior an agent would still want to know.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, then how to drive it, then the caveat. The campground/marina/hotel example earns its place by clarifying what 'place at that point' means. No sentence is redundant with another.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by listing the four area units plus perimeter. Zero required parameters means the either/or input model needed explaining, and that is done. The remaining gap is failure behavior when no OSM feature is found and any coverage limits.

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 the schema already documents lat/lon, address, country and polygon formats, including the up-to-5,000-point limit. The description adds mode-level meaning (polygon = exact, address/point = OSM approximation) and names real sources of polygons such as county parcel maps or deed plans. That is genuine but modest added meaning over a fully documented 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 opens with a concrete output statement: area in acres, hectares, square feet and square metres plus perimeter of a site. That is a specific resource with a specific computed result, far beyond restating the name. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling area_profile, so it stops short of 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 Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It clearly splits the two usage modes: pass a polygon for an exact figure, or supply an address or lat/lon to measure the OpenStreetMap outline. It also implies the boundary of legitimate use by warning that an OSM outline is not a legal boundary. It never names a sibling tool as an alternative, so the routing guidance is contextual rather than explicit.

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 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.