Skip to main content
Glama

Reverse geocode

reverse_geocode
Read-only

Convert GPS latitude and longitude coordinates into city, state, and country place names using Immich's built-in offline geodata, so you can label map markers or photo EXIF locations without contacting external services.

Instructions

Resolve GPS coordinates to a place name using Immich's own offline geodata. Use this to name the location of a marker from get_map_markers or of an asset's EXIF coordinates — no external service is contacted. Read-only.

Args:
    lat: Latitude in decimal degrees.
    lon: Longitude in decimal degrees.

Returns: JSON with total and a places array of {city, state, country} candidates.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latYes
lonYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.0.2

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description restates "Read-only" while adding genuinely new context: resolution happens offline with no external service contacted. It does not discuss accuracy, ambiguity of candidates, or latency, which for an offline geodata lookup would be useful.

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, then usage, then a structured Args/Returns block. Nearly every line earns its place given the empty parameter descriptions in the schema; the standalone "Read-only." sentence partly duplicates the annotation but serves as a safety signal.

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?

For a two-parameter lookup tool with an output schema present, the description covers the action, data source, invocation context, parameter units, and candidate-list shape. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 0% — the properties are bare numbers titled only "Lat" and "Lon" — so the Args block does real work by fixing the units as decimal degrees and pairing each value with its axis. Two well-documented parameters warrant a 4.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ("Resolve GPS coordinates to a place name") and adds a distinguishing qualifier — Immich's own offline geodata. It doesn't explicitly contrast with name-based siblings like search_places or search_cities, but the coordinate-in/place-out framing 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 Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete triggering contexts: naming a marker returned by get_map_markers or an asset's EXIF coordinates. No exclusion or "do not use when" guidance is offered, and the relationship to the name-search siblings is left implicit.

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