Skip to main content
Glama
es3154

Turf-MCP

by es3154

helper_multiPoint

Create GeoJSON MultiPoint features from coordinate arrays to represent groups of related point elements in geospatial analysis.

Instructions

创建多点特征对象。

此功能根据坐标点数组创建多点特征,用于表示一组相关的点要素。

Args: coordinates: 多点坐标数组 - 类型: str (JSON 字符串格式的数组) - 格式: [[lng1, lat1], [lng2, lat2], ...] - 示例: '[[0, 0], [10, 10]]'

properties: 属性对象
    - 类型: str (JSON 字符串) 或 None
    - 格式: 键值对对象
    - 示例: '{"name": "point group"}'

options: 可选参数配置
    - 类型: str (JSON 字符串) 或 None
    - 可选字段:
        - bbox: 边界框数组 [minX, minY, maxX, maxY]
        - id: 特征的标识符
    - 示例: '{"bbox": [-1, -1, 11, 11], "id": "multi_point1"}'

Returns: str: JSON 字符串格式的 GeoJSON MultiPoint Feature - 类型: GeoJSON Feature with MultiPoint geometry - 格式: {"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "MultiPoint", "coordinates": [...]}, "properties": {...}} - 示例: '{"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "MultiPoint", "coordinates": [[0, 0], [10, 10]]}, "properties": {"name": "point group"}}'

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 >>> coordinates = '[[0, 0], [10, 10]]' >>> properties = '{"name": "point group"}' >>> result = asyncio.run(multiPoint(coordinates, properties)) >>> print(result) '{"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "MultiPoint", "coordinates": [[0, 0], [10, 10]]}, "properties": {"name": "point group"}}'

Notes: - 输入参数 coordinates、properties 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) - 多点特征包含多个独立的点 - 依赖于 Turf.js 库和 Node.js 环境

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
coordinatesYes
propertiesNo
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 of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes key behaviors: the tool creates a GeoJSON MultiPoint Feature, requires valid JSON strings for inputs, uses [longitude, latitude] order in WGS84, and raises exceptions for failures, timeouts, or bad input. It also notes dependencies on Turf.js and Node.js. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or side effects beyond creation.

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 sections (Args, Returns, Raises, Example, Notes), making it easy to navigate. It is appropriately sized but could be more front-loaded; the purpose is clear early, but some details (like dependencies) are in Notes. Most sentences earn their place, though minor trimming is possible.

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 tool with 3 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, but an output schema (implied by Returns section), the description is complete. It covers purpose, parameters, return values, errors, examples, and notes on dependencies and formats. The output schema is described in detail, so no gaps exist given the complexity.

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?

Given schema description coverage is 0%, the description compensates fully by detailing all three parameters (coordinates, properties, options) with types, formats, examples, and optional fields. It adds meaning beyond the basic schema by specifying JSON string formats, coordinate arrays, property key-value pairs, and option fields like bbox and id, which are not in the 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: '创建多点特征对象' (create a multipoint feature object) and elaborates that it '根据坐标点数组创建多点特征,用于表示一组相关的点要素' (creates a multipoint feature based on a coordinate point array, used to represent a set of related point features). This specifies the verb ('创建' - create), resource ('多点特征对象' - multipoint feature object), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like helper_point (single point) or helper_lineString (line).

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 by explaining the tool's purpose for representing related point features, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., helper_point for single points, helper_featureCollection for collections). It provides technical context (e.g., coordinate format, JSON string requirements) but lacks explicit guidance on tool selection among siblings.

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