Skip to main content
Glama
es3154

Turf-MCP

by es3154

booleans_booleanClockwise

Determine if a geographic polygon ring follows clockwise orientation to identify external boundaries versus internal holes in spatial data analysis.

Instructions

检查环是否为顺时针方向。

此功能检查给定的坐标环(多边形边界)是否为顺时针方向。

Args: ring: 坐标环数组 - 类型: str (JSON 字符串格式的数组) - 格式: [[x1, y1], [x2, y2], [x3, y3], ...] - 示例: '[[0, 0], [1, 0], [1, 1], [0, 1], [0, 0]]'

Returns: str: JSON 字符串格式的布尔结果 - 类型: 包含 value 的对象 - 格式: {"value": true 或 false} - 示例: '{"value": true}'

Raises: Exception: 当 JavaScript 执行失败、超时或输入数据格式错误时抛出异常

Example: >>> import asyncio >>> ring = '[[0, 0], [1, 0], [1, 1], [0, 1], [0, 0]]' >>> result = asyncio.run(booleanClockwise(ring)) >>> print(result) '{"value": true}'

Notes: - 输入参数 ring 必须是有效的 JSON 字符串 - 坐标顺序为 [经度, 纬度] (WGS84 坐标系) - 顺时针环在多边形中表示外部边界 - 逆时针环在多边形中表示内部孔洞 - 依赖于 Turf.js 库和 Node.js 环境

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ringYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing: the tool's dependency on Turf.js and Node.js environment, potential exceptions for JavaScript execution failures/timeouts/input errors, coordinate system (WGS84 with [longitude, latitude] order), and return format. It doesn't mention performance characteristics or rate limits, but covers essential behavioral aspects.

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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections (Args, Returns, Raises, Example, Notes) and front-loads the core purpose. Some redundancy exists between the initial statement and the expanded explanation, but overall it's efficiently organized with each section earning its place.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (geometric orientation check), no annotations, 0% schema coverage, but presence of output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers purpose, parameters, returns, errors, examples, dependencies, coordinate systems, and geometric semantics - providing everything needed for correct tool invocation.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage (schema only says 'ring' is a string), the description fully compensates by providing comprehensive parameter documentation: exact JSON string format with array structure [[x1, y1], ...], coordinate order, example, and validation requirements. This adds substantial meaning beyond the minimal schema.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose as '检查环是否为顺时针方向' (check if a ring is clockwise), specifying both the verb (check) and resource (ring). It distinguishes from siblings like 'booleans_booleanContains' or 'booleans_booleanWithin' by focusing specifically on ring orientation rather than spatial relationships between geometries.

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?

The description provides clear context about when to use this tool through the 'Notes' section, explaining that clockwise rings represent external polygon boundaries and counterclockwise rings represent internal holes. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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/es3154/turf-mcp'

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