Skip to main content
Glama

analyze_parcel

Read-onlyIdempotent

Analyze a parcel boundary by providing GeoJSON or a point coordinate. Get total acres, per-member breakdown, contiguous flag, and a representative point for site evaluation handoff.

Instructions

Structured read of a parcel BOUNDARY — pass your own GeoJSON Polygon/MultiPolygon, OR just lat+lon and DC Hub finds the containing parcel in its HOSTED parcel-boundary layer (free county/state GIS polygons, rolling out by data-center market — Loudoun County VA first; a point outside hosted coverage returns an honest 404 with the coverage list, never a guess). Returns _entity=parcel_analysis: geodesic total_acres, a per-member acreage breakdown, a contiguous flag, representative_point = the centroid of the LARGEST-area member (never the multi-part geometric center, which can land off-parcel on a highway median or river and poison every point-keyed read), and hosted_parcel {parcel_id, county, state, acres_per_source} when the polygon came from the hosted layer. Also returns a site_evaluation_handoff to pipe into analyze_site + get_water_risk at that anchor. Use when you HAVE a boundary or a point on a specific parcel and want it anchored + sized; for a general lat/lon site score use analyze_site; for the interconnection-queue survivor set use get_refined_queue (queue rows carry NO parcel identity, so they never auto-join to hosted parcels).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latNoLatitude of a point ON the parcel — used with lon when geometry is omitted to look up the containing parcel from the hosted county/state GIS layer
lonNoLongitude of a point ON the parcel (used with lat when geometry is omitted)
geometryYesGeoJSON Polygon or MultiPolygon parcel boundary, e.g. {"type":"Polygon","coordinates":[[[lng,lat],[lng,lat],...]]} — a MultiPolygon carries discontinuous parcels as one envelope. Omit to look up the hosted parcel containing lat/lon instead
capacity_mwNoOptional target load in MW to pass through into the site_evaluation_handoff
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but description goes beyond: explains return fields (total_acres, acreage breakdown, contiguous flag), special handling of representative_point (centroid of largest area member, not geometric center), and error behavior (honest 404 with coverage list). No contradictions.

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?

Description is detailed but every sentence contributes. It is structured logically: purpose, parameter modes, return values, usage guidance, edge cases. Could be slightly more concise but appropriate for complexity.

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?

Despite no output schema, description thoroughly explains return fields and their semantics. Covers integration with analyze_site and get_water_risk via site_evaluation_handoff. Handles edge case of out-of-coverage point. Complete for this tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining that geometry is optional and lat/lon can be used for hosted lookup, and that capacity_mw is passed to handoff. It clarifies the relationship between parameters beyond schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly states 'Structured read of a parcel BOUNDARY' and distinguishes from siblings like analyze_site and get_refined_queue. The verb 'read' and resource 'parcel' are specific, and it differentiates from related tools by specifying when to use each.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says 'Use when you HAVE a boundary or a point on a specific parcel' and warns against using for general site scores or queue queries, pointing to analyze_site and get_refined_queue instead. Also explains edge case of point outside coverage.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/azmartone67/dchub-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server