Skip to main content
Glama
es3154

Turf-MCP

by es3154

feature_conversion_line_to_polygon

Convert GeoJSON line features to polygon geometries by automatically closing line endpoints. This tool transforms LineString or MultiLineString data into Polygon or MultiPolygon features for spatial analysis.

Instructions

将线转换为多边形。

此功能将线几何图形转换为多边形几何图形,自动闭合线段的起点和终点。

Args: line: GeoJSON 线特征或几何图形 - 类型: str (JSON 字符串格式的 GeoJSON) - 格式: 必须符合 GeoJSON LineString 或 MultiLineString 规范 - 坐标系: WGS84 (经度在前,纬度在后) - 示例: '{"type": "LineString", "coordinates": [[125, -30], [145, -30], [145, -20], [125, -20], [125, -30]]}'

options: 可选参数配置
    - 类型: str (JSON 字符串) 或 None
    - 可选字段:
        - properties: 传递给多边形的属性对象
        - autoComplete: 是否自动完成线段闭合
        - orderCoords: 是否重新排序坐标
        - mutate: 是否修改原始线特征
    - 示例: '{"properties": {"name": "converted polygon"}}'

Returns: str: JSON 字符串格式的 GeoJSON Polygon 或 MultiPolygon 特征 - 类型: GeoJSON Feature with Polygon or MultiPolygon geometry - 格式: {"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "Polygon", "coordinates": [...]}}

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 >>> line = '{"type": "LineString", "coordinates": [[125, -30], [145, -30], [145, -20], [125, -20], [125, -30]]}' >>> options = '{"properties": {"name": "converted polygon"}}' >>> result = asyncio.run(line_to_polygon(line, options)) >>> print(result) '{"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "Polygon", "coordinates": [[[125, -30], [145, -30], [145, -20], [125, -20], [125, -30]]]}}'

Notes: - 输入参数 line 和 options 必须是有效的 JSON 字符串 - 坐标顺序为 [经度, 纬度] (WGS84 坐标系) - 线会自动闭合形成多边形边界 - 依赖于 Turf.js 库和 Node.js 环境

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lineYes
optionsNo

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 the full burden. It effectively discloses key behavioral traits: the tool automatically closes line segments, accepts optional configuration parameters (properties, autoComplete, orderCoords, mutate), specifies the return format (GeoJSON Polygon/MultiPolygon as JSON string), and mentions error conditions (JavaScript execution failure, timeout, invalid input). It also notes dependencies on Turf.js and Node.js environment, which is valuable context.

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), making it easy to parse. It's appropriately sized for a tool with 2 parameters and no annotations. Some sections like the example are detailed but necessary for clarity. Minor redundancy in notes (e.g., repeating JSON string requirement) slightly reduces efficiency.

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 complexity (geometric conversion with options), no annotations, and an output schema present, the description is highly complete. It covers purpose, parameters, return values, errors, examples, and dependencies. The output schema handles return structure, so the description appropriately focuses on semantics and usage context without duplicating schema details.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must fully compensate. It provides comprehensive parameter details: 'line' is described with type, format, coordinate system, and an example; 'options' is detailed with type, optional fields, and an example. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema, covering all 2 parameters thoroughly.

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: '将线转换为多边形' (convert line to polygon). It specifies the exact transformation (line geometry to polygon geometry) and mentions automatic closure of start and end points. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'feature_conversion_polygon_to_line' which performs the reverse operation.

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?

The description implies usage context through the example and notes (e.g., input must be valid JSON strings, coordinate order, dependency on Turf.js/Node.js). However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'feature_conversion_polygonize' or 'feature_conversion_combine', nor does it provide exclusion criteria or prerequisites beyond format requirements.

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