Skip to main content
Glama
es3154

Turf-MCP

by es3154

measurement_center

Calculate the geometric center point of GeoJSON feature collections to determine central locations for spatial analysis and mapping applications.

Instructions

计算特征集合的中心点。

此功能计算给定特征集合的几何中心,返回所有特征边界框的中心点位置。

Args: geojson: GeoJSON 特征集合 - 类型: str (JSON 字符串格式的 GeoJSON) - 格式: 必须符合 GeoJSON FeatureCollection 规范 - 坐标系: WGS84 (经度在前,纬度在后) - 示例: '{"type": "FeatureCollection", "features": [{"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "Point", "coordinates": [-97.522259, 35.4691]}}, ...]}'

options: 可选参数配置
    - 类型: str (JSON 字符串) 或 None
    - 可选字段:
        - properties: 传递给中心点的属性对象
        - bbox: 边界框数组
        - id: 传递给中心点的 ID
    - 示例: '{"properties": {"name": "center point"}}'

Returns: str: JSON 字符串格式的 GeoJSON Point 特征 - 类型: GeoJSON Feature with Point geometry - 格式: {"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "Point", "coordinates": [lng, lat]}} - 示例: '{"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "Point", "coordinates": [-97.5, 35.5]}}'

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 >>> geojson = '{"type": "FeatureCollection", "features": [{"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "Point", "coordinates": [-97.522259, 35.4691]}}]}' >>> options = '{"properties": {"name": "center point"}}' >>> result = asyncio.run(center(geojson, options)) >>> print(result) '{"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "Point", "coordinates": [-97.5, 35.5]}}'

Notes: - 输入参数 geojson 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) - 返回的中心点是所有特征边界框的中心 - 依赖于 Turf.js 库和 Node.js 环境

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
geojsonYes
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 full burden and does an excellent job. It discloses critical behavioral traits: coordinate system (WGS84 with longitude-first), return format (GeoJSON Point feature), error conditions (JavaScript execution failures, timeouts, input format errors), dependencies (Turf.js and Node.js environment), and that it calculates the center of bounding boxes specifically. No contradictions exist since annotations are absent.

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-loaded purpose statement. While comprehensive, some sections could be more concise - the example includes import statements that aren't strictly necessary. Overall, most sentences earn their place by providing essential information.

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 calculations with specific dependencies), no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, the description provides complete context. It covers purpose, parameters, return values, error conditions, examples, and implementation dependencies. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values in the description, but the description still provides useful format 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing comprehensive parameter documentation. It explains both parameters in detail: 'geojson' with format requirements, coordinate system, and examples; 'options' with optional fields, data types, and examples. The description adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema, covering format constraints and usage examples.

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: '计算特征集合的中心点' (calculates the geometric center of a feature collection). It specifies the exact resource (GeoJSON feature collection) and verb (calculate center point), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'measurement_centerOfMass' and 'measurement_centroid' by explicitly stating it returns the center of the bounding box rather than other center types.

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 for when to use this tool: for calculating the geometric center of bounding boxes in GeoJSON feature collections. It doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives, but the distinction from other center-related tools is implied through the specific behavior description.

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