Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
google-maps-mcp

google-maps-mcp

by benjamin-di
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Show places

maps_show_places
Read-onlyIdempotent

Show recommended or compared places as interactive cards with photos, ratings, hours, contact links, notes, and lettered map pins so users can evaluate options at a glance.

Instructions

Show places to the person as cards: photo, rating, category, open now, today's hours, holiday notices, address, phone, website, reserve, directions and Map links, your note, plus a map with lettered pins (claude.ai and ChatGPT draw them). Use it whenever you recommend or compare places; ids come from maps_search_places.

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": {
      "items": "<items>"
    },
    "name": "maps_show_places"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsYesPlaces to show, in order
titleNoHeading above the cards

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.6.1

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive), and the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the output is a visual card + lettered-pin map, rendering depends on the host client ('claude.ai and ChatGPT draw them'), and the note is surfaced verbatim. It does not say whether the model receives any textual confirmation back, which is the one remaining unknown for a display-only side effect.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, and the long field enumeration does earn its place by telling the agent what will visibly render. It is dense but not padded; a shorter summary would lose the useful detail about host-dependent map rendering.

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 two-parameter, no-output-schema tool with full annotation coverage, the description covers purpose, source of ids, rendering surface, and card contents. The only gap is an explicit statement that this produces a user-visible artifact and returns no data payload for the model to reason over.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both params are already documented, and the description mostly restates them ('your note', ids from maps_search_places). It adds a little meaning by implying the pin letters follow the supplied order, but offers no format or ordering guidance beyond the schema's own 'in order' note.

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 verb and resource ('Show places to the person as cards') and then enumerates exactly what the card contains, so an agent knows this is a rendering tool rather than a lookup. This clearly distinguishes it from maps_get_place (retrieve data) and maps_search_places (find ids).

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives an explicit usage trigger ('Use it whenever you recommend or compare places') and a prerequisite chain ('ids come from maps_search_places'). It does not state exclusions, e.g. that a single-place detail lookup should go to maps_get_place or that map rendering for routes uses maps_show_route, so sibling disambiguation is partial.

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