Skip to main content
Glama
Knight60

ArcGIS Pro MCP

by Knight60
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

add_layer

Adds a feature class, shapefile, raster, table, .lyrx layer, or web service to an ArcGIS Pro map via path or URL. Optionally specify map, position, or group layer.

Instructions

Add data to a map from a path or service URL: feature class, shapefile, raster, table, .lyrx layer file or web service.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesDataset path or service URL.
map_nameNoMap to act on; defaults to the active map.
positionNoAUTO_ARRANGE, TOP or BOTTOM.AUTO_ARRANGE
group_layerNoOptional group layer to add it into.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / group_layer
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Optional group layer to add it into.",
+  "title": "Group Layer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / map_name / description
      Added value: +"Map to act on; defaults to the active map."
    • addedInput schema / properties / path / description
      Added value: +"Dataset path or service URL."
    • addedInput schema / properties / position
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "AUTO_ARRANGE",
+  "description": "AUTO_ARRANGE, TOP or BOTTOM.",
+  "title": "Position",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says data is added but does not disclose what happens on an invalid path, required permissions/licensing, how the target map is chosen (that is only in the schema), or whether an existing layer is overwritten. An output schema exists, which offsets return-value concerns, but the mutation's side effects remain undisclosed.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence: verb + destination first, then the accepted input types. No filler, though the enumerated list is long enough that the key 'add to a map' framing is slightly buried.

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?

An output schema lets the description skip return values, and the schema documents all four parameters, so basics are covered. However, for an unannotated mutation tool it is thin on side effects, failure modes, and how it relates to add_web_layer.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, and the description genuinely enriches the path parameter by enumerating the concrete dataset and service types it accepts. Still, it adds nothing to position, group_layer, or map_name beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb (Add) plus resource (data to a map) and enumerates accepted inputs (feature class, shapefile, raster, table, .lyrx, web service). It is clear and concrete, but does not differentiate itself from the sibling add_web_layer, which it overlaps with by mentioning service URLs.

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?

The description gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and never mentions alternatives such as add_web_layer or create_map. The agent must infer from the sibling list when this tool is the right choice.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools