google-maps-mcp

Maps Get Place

maps_get_place

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a place by ID to view current opening hours for the next 7 days, open-now status, next open and close times, holidays, reservation links, and menu URI.

Instructions

One place by id (Places API Place shape, same fields as maps_search_places), with currentOpeningHours for the next 7 days: dated periods, weekdayDescriptions, openNow, nextOpenTime/nextCloseTime and holidays, plus reservationLinks [{uri, provider}] and menuUri.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "maps_get_place"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Place id (ChIJ…) from maps_search_places

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.6.1Oct 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description's added substance is mostly field-level detail on the response (opening hours structure, reservation links), which is closer to restating the output schema than to disclosing behavior such as quota cost, language/region effects on returned fields, or whether openNow is computed at request time. Useful but not behaviorally deep.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the core action ("One place by id") before the field inventory. The tail listing of return fields is dense and largely duplicated by the output schema, so it is slightly over-allocated, but not enough to call the text wasteful.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a one-parameter read tool with a full output schema and complete annotations, the description supplies the essentials: what is returned, the id's origin, and how it relates to maps_search_places. The only meaningful hole is when to prefer this over maps_show_places or a fresh search, which is a routing concern rather than a calling-correctness concern.

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

Parameters3/5

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

There is a single required parameter at 100% schema description coverage, and the schema already explains the id format and provenance ("Place id (ChIJ…) from maps_search_places"). The description's "by id" adds no syntax, format, or validation meaning beyond that, so the high-coverage baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource and scope — a single place fetched by id — and explicitly anchors it to the sibling tool's return shape ("same fields as maps_search_places"), so an agent knows this is the single-object counterpart to the search tool. The follow-on clause enumerates exactly what extra data arrives (currentOpeningHours, reservationLinks, menuUri), so the tool's role is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: the id parameter is described as coming "from maps_search_places," which hints at the search-then-get workflow, but the description never says "call this when you already have a place id" nor excludes any situation. No comparison to maps_show_places, which looks like the closest sibling and could plausibly also render a place, is offered.

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

Deploy Server