adu-zoning
Server Details
Check if a Florida address can build an ADU: county GIS zoning, eligibility verdict, local rules.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.5/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap with other tools.
The single tool name 'check_adu_eligibility' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, is descriptive, and uses consistent snake_case.
A single tool is thin for a server named 'adu-zoning', but it serves a very specific purpose (checking ADU eligibility in Florida). It is borderline appropriate.
The tool covers the primary use case of checking ADU eligibility and returns relevant rules, but it is limited to Florida properties, leaving a minor gap for other locations.
Available Tools
1 toolcheck_adu_eligibilityAInspect
Check whether a specific Florida property can build an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU / backyard cottage / granny flat / in-law suite). Returns the parcel's zoning code, jurisdiction (city vs. unincorporated county), an eligibility verdict, and local ADU rules (max size, owner-occupancy, short-term-rental limits) from live county GIS data. Use whenever a user asks if an ADU is allowed at a Florida address — Florida has no statewide ADU law, so this cannot be answered by guessing.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| address | Yes | Full Florida street address, e.g. '123 Main St, Tampa, FL 33602'. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It fully discloses the tool's behavior: returns zoning code, jurisdiction, eligibility verdict, and local ADU rules from live county GIS data. It also explains why this cannot be guessed, setting expectations about data source.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise (3 sentences) and front-loaded with the primary purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, return details, usage guidance. No fluff.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite no output schema, the description enumerates the return fields (zoning, jurisdiction, verdict, rules). The tool is simple (one parameter) and the description fully covers what the agent needs to know to use it correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100% (address parameter is well-described). The description adds no additional parameter details beyond the schema, but the schema already provides a clear example and format. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description starts with a clear verb+resource: 'Check whether a specific Florida property can build an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU ...)', and enumerates specific return fields (zoning code, jurisdiction, eligibility verdict, local rules). It distinguishes the tool from guessing, which is critical given no statewide law.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly states when to use: 'Use whenever a user asks if an ADU is allowed at a Florida address'. It also provides context (Florida has no statewide ADU law) that justifies tool usage. No explicit when-not, but the context is clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Servers
- Flicense-qualityCmaintenanceLA County ADU buildability checks, zoning rules, permit trends, and cost estimates — free, no auth.
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceAI-powered property intelligence for instant zoning analysis, buildability assessments, ADU eligibility, flood risk, and development feasibility reports for any US address.51MIT
- Alicense-qualityBmaintenanceAssesses natural hazard exposure (flood, wildfire, earthquake, coastal proximity) for a single US property address using only free, keyless public data.MIT
- Alicense-qualityCmaintenanceEnables searching and querying Indian River County, Florida open geospatial datasets (parcels, addresses, zoning, public works) through natural language or direct tool calls.7MIT