maptiler_get_data_featuresFetch the GeoJSON FeatureCollection of a MapTiler-hosted dataset by its data id. API: GET /data/{dataId}/features.json.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| dataId | Yes | MapTiler dataset id (from your MapTiler Cloud account). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. The description adds that it returns a GeoJSON FeatureCollection and specifies the API endpoint, but no further behavioral details (e.g., authentication, rate limits) are provided.
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 extremely concise with two sentences, front-loading the action and resource, with no unnecessary words.
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?
For a simple read operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the return type and API call. However, it lacks details on error handling or pagination, which are minor given the simplicity.
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 coverage is 100%, and the description does not add meaning beyond the schema's parameter description. The baseline of 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 clearly states the action (Fetch) and resource (GeoJSON FeatureCollection of a MapTiler-hosted dataset), and it is distinct from sibling tools which focus on geocoding, elevation, and coordinate transformations.
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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the context is implied given the sibling tools serve different purposes. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: forward geocoding (batch and single), reverse geocoding, IP geolocation, data features retrieval, elevation lookup, coordinate system search, and coordinate transformation. There is no overlap or ambiguity among them.
All tools follow a verb_noun pattern with underscores, prefixed by 'maptiler_'. While most are consistent (e.g., 'get_elevation', 'search_coordinate_systems'), 'reverse_geocode' and 'geolocate_ip' are slight variations but still clear. The naming is predictable and readable.
8 tools is an appropriate number for a geolocation and mapping utility server. Each tool serves a distinct operation without being excessive or insufficient. The scope is well-defined.
The tool set covers core geolocation operations: forward/reverse geocoding, batch processing, IP geolocation, elevation, coordinate systems, and data features. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no map tile retrieval or routing), but the set is complete for the advertised functionality.