Burs-IA Utils

Longitud de un recorrido

geo-path-length

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calcula la longitud total de una ruta por varios puntos y distancia por tramo. Cuándo: hay que calcular coordenadas, distancias, rumbos o áreas a partir de puntos dados. No para: calcular la distancia ortodrómica entre dos puntos (geo-haversine). Efectos secundarios: ninguno (solo lectura, sin red, sin estado guardado). Determinista: la misma entrada da la misma salida. Límites: entrada JSON de hasta 64 KB, 1 s por llamada, resultado de hasta 1 MB.

EN: Computes the total great-circle length of a path through up to 100,000 points, with per-segment distances (first 1,000). When: coordinates, distances, bearings or areas have to be computed from given points. Not for: computing the great-circle distance between two lat/lon points on a spherical Earth (geo-haversine). Side effects: none (read-only, no network access, no stored state). Deterministic: the same input gives the same output. Limits: JSON input up to 64 KB, 1 s per call, result up to 1 MB.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`unit`	No	Distance unit (optional; one of: m, km, mi, nmi, ft; default "km").	km
`points`	Yes	Points in order (array of object; required; at least 2 items).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`unit`	No
`total`	No
`segments`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 2, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / points / examples

Added value: +[
+  [
+    {
+      "lat": 4.711,
+      "lon": -74.0721
+    },
+    {
+      "lat": 6.2442,
+      "lon": -75.5812
+    },
+    {
+      "lat": 4.711,
+      "lon": -74.0721
+    }
+  ]
+]

First observedNov 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantive context beyond the annotations: no network access, no stored state, determinism, and hard limits (64 KB input, 1 s per call, 1 MB result). These operational constraints are not derivable from readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/openWorldHint and directly affect how an agent should size its call.

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-loaded with the purpose and organized by explicit labels (When / Not for / Side effects / Deterministic / Limits), which scans well. It loses a point for being duplicated verbatim in Spanish and English and for the over-broad 'bearings or areas' scope claim, which is noise for this tool.

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, deterministic computation with full schema coverage, an output schema, and complete annotations, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing: scope, exclusion, side-effect profile, determinism, and resource limits are all present.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns a bump by disclosing the 100,000-point cap and the 1,000-segment truncation of per-segment output, the latter of which appears nowhere in the schema. It does not restate the unit enum, but the schema already handles that fully.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: computes total great-circle length of a path through up to 100,000 points, plus per-segment distances (first 1,000). It is immediately distinguishable from geo-haversine, which the description names explicitly as the wrong tool for two-point distance.

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 gives an explicit 'Not for' clause naming the alternative (geo-haversine) and the condition that selects it, which is exactly what routing needs. The 'When' clause is weaker: 'coordinates, distances, bearings or areas' describes the whole geo family rather than this tool's output, since this tool returns only length and per-segment distances, not bearings or areas.

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

All Burs-IA Utils tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?