Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

gisgp

by io.github.uponex
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

nearest_features_geojson

For each feature in A, find the nearest feature in B by centroid-to- centroid geodesic distance. Attaches _nearest properties and _nearest_distance_m. Returns JSON {ok, geojson}.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "geojson_a": "<geojson_a>",
      "geojson_b": "<geojson_b>"
    },
    "name": "nearest_features_geojson"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
geojson_aYes
geojson_bYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so description must carry the burden. It discloses the algorithm (centroid-to-centroid geodesic) and output structure, but fails to mention edge cases, performance implications, or authentication needs.

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?

Two sentences with no superfluous information. The key action and output are stated upfront, but the brevity sacrifices completeness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Covers core function and return format, but lacks details about parameter semantics and usage context. With an output schema present, return values are partly explained, but overall still leaves gaps for a new user.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description does not elaborate on the two required string parameters. It only names them without clarifying expected format (e.g., GeoJSON structure) or constraints.

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?

Clearly states it finds nearest feature by centroid-to-centroid geodesic distance and attaches properties. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like spatial_join_geojson or buffer_geojson, which might serve similar purposes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, spatial_join_geojson is a sibling that might offer different join criteria, but no comparison or conditions are provided.

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

All gisgp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources