Burs-IA Utils

Área y perímetro de polígono

geo-polygon-area

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calcula el área (exceso esférico) y perímetro de un polígono lon/lat, en m², km², hectáreas y acres. Cuándo: hay que calcular coordenadas, distancias, rumbos o áreas a partir de puntos dados. No para: verificar si un punto está dentro de un polígono (geo-point-in-polygon). 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 area (spherical excess on the mean-radius sphere) and perimeter of a lon/lat polygon ring, in m², km², hectares and acres. When: coordinates, distances, bearings or areas have to be computed from given points. Not for: testing whether a point lies inside a polygon (geo-point-in-polygon). 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
`ring`	Yes	Ring as [[lon,lat],…] (closing point optional) (array of array; required; at least 3 items).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`acres`	No
`area_m2`	No
`area_km2`	No
`hectares`	No
`perimeter_m`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 2, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / ring / examples

Added value: +[
+  [
+    [
+      0,
+      0
+    ],
+    [
+      0.001,
+      0
+    ],
+    [
+      0.001,
+      0.001
+    ],
+    [
+      0,
+      0.001
+    ]
+  ]
+]

First observedNov 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint=false, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds information the annotations do not carry: determinism, the 64 KB input cap, the 1 s per-call budget and the 1 MB result limit. That is genuine operational context beyond structured fields, though nothing is said about how degenerate rings (self-intersection, winding order) are handled.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Content is well front-loaded and labeled (Cuándo / No para / Efectos / Determinista / Límites), which makes it easy to scan. But the entire text is duplicated in Spanish and English, roughly doubling length with zero added information for any single reader, which undercuts conciseness.

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 single-parameter read-only computation with an output schema, annotations and full schema coverage, the description supplies everything else an agent needs: output units, the area model, determinism, and explicit size/time limits. No material gap remains.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage and a worked example, so the schema carries the semantics. The description repeats the lon/lat framing but adds no format or edge-case detail (winding order, closing-point handling, antimeridian) beyond what the schema already states. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (computes area and perimeter), the exact resource (a lon/lat polygon ring), the algorithm (spherical excess on the mean-radius sphere) and the output units (m², km², hectares, acres). It also names the sibling it must not be confused with, geo-point-in-polygon, so an agent can separate the two without opening either schema.

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 'No para' line gives an explicit exclusion with the alternative named. However the positive 'Cuándo' clause ('coordinates, distances, bearings or areas have to be computed from given points') is broad enough to also describe geo-haversine, geo-bearing and geo-path-length, so the routing guidance is clearer on what to avoid than on what to prefer.

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?