Skip to main content
Glama

Arcgis Pima

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search Datasets

search_datasets
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search Pima County GIS open geospatial datasets (parcels, addresses, zoning & public works) by keyword. Returns each dataset's name, summary, record_count, owner/org, and its Feature Service url — pass that url to query_layer / layer_info.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax datasets (1-50, default 20).
queryNoKeyword(s), e.g. "parcels", "crime", "flood zones".
org_idNoOptional ArcGIS orgId to override the default (Pima County GIS).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "query": "parcels"
+  },
+  {
+    "limit": 10,
+    "query": "zoning"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, reducing the burden. The description adds value by detailing the output contents (name, summary, record_count, owner/org, url) and the scope (Pima County GIS open data), which are not in 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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with action and scope, with each sentence contributing meaningful information. No wasted words.

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?

Given no output schema, the description helpfully lists the returned fields and suggests next steps. It covers essential usage context, though it omits edge cases like no-result behavior or pagination details.

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% with descriptions for query, limit, and org_id. The description does not add parameter-level details beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 clearly states the tool searches Pima County GIS open geospatial datasets by keyword, with specific examples. It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming downstream tools (query_layer/layer_info) and listing the exact return fields.

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 implies the intended workflow: use this tool to discover datasets, then pass the returned Feature Service url to query_layer/layer_info. It gives clear context and a usage pattern, though it doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives.

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

All Arcgis Pima 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