Skip to main content
Glama
es3154

Turf-MCP

by es3154

measurement_destination

Calculate a destination point from a starting location using specified distance and bearing. This tool determines geographic coordinates by moving from an origin point along a defined direction for a set distance.

Instructions

从起点计算指定距离和方位角的目标点。

此功能从给定起点出发,沿着指定方位角移动指定距离,计算并返回目标点的位置坐标。

Args: origin: 起点 GeoJSON Point 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 Point 规范 - 坐标系: WGS84 (经度在前,纬度在后) - 示例: '{"type": "Point", "coordinates": [-75.343, 39.984]}'

distance: 移动距离
    - 类型: float
    - 描述: 从起点开始移动的距离值
    - 示例: 50.0

bearing: 方位角
    - 类型: float
    - 描述: 从北方向顺时针测量的角度
    - 范围: -180 到 180 度
    - 示例: 90.0

options: 可选参数配置
    - 类型: str (JSON 字符串) 或 None
    - 可选字段:
        - units: 距离单位 (默认: 'kilometers')
            - 有效值: 'miles', 'nauticalmiles', 'kilometers', 'meters', 'yards', 'feet', 'inches'
        - properties: 传递给目标点的属性对象
    - 示例: '{"units": "miles", "properties": {"name": "destination"}}'

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": [-74.5, 39.5]}}'

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 >>> origin = '{"type": "Point", "coordinates": [-75.343, 39.984]}' >>> options = '{"units": "miles", "properties": {"name": "destination"}}' >>> result = asyncio.run(destination(origin, 50.0, 90.0, options)) >>> print(result) '{"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "Point", "coordinates": [-74.5, 39.5]}}'

Notes: - 输入参数 origin 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) - 方位角是从北方向顺时针测量的角度 - 依赖于 Turf.js 库和 Node.js 环境

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
originYes
distanceYes
bearingYes
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 well by disclosing key behavioral traits: it specifies the coordinate system (WGS84), input format requirements (valid JSON strings), angle measurement convention (clockwise from north), dependencies (Turf.js and Node.js), and error conditions (exceptions for execution failure, timeout, or bad input). However, it doesn't mention performance characteristics or rate limits.

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, it could be more concise by reducing some redundancy in parameter explanations, but every sentence adds value.

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 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, but with output schema (implied by Returns section), the description is complete: it covers purpose, all parameters, return format, error conditions, examples, and implementation notes. The output schema in the Returns section eliminates need to explain return values separately.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing comprehensive parameter documentation: detailed type information, format specifications, value ranges, examples, and optional field explanations for all 4 parameters. It adds significant meaning beyond what the bare schema provides.

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 specific action ('从起点计算指定距离和方位角的目标点' - calculate a destination point from a starting point given distance and bearing), identifies the resource (GeoJSON Point), and distinguishes it from siblings by focusing on destination calculation rather than other geometric operations like measurement_bearing or measurement_distance.

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 through parameter explanations and examples, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like measurement_rhumbDestination or other sibling tools. It provides context for the calculation but lacks explicit guidance on tool selection.

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