Skip to main content
Glama
es3154

Turf-MCP

by es3154

transformation_circle

Create circular geographic areas from center points and radii for spatial analysis. Specify units and smoothness to generate GeoJSON polygon features.

Instructions

根据中心点和半径创建圆形区域。

此功能以指定的中心点和半径生成一个圆形多边形区域,可以控制圆形的平滑度和单位。

Args: center: 中心点 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 规范或坐标数组 - 坐标系: WGS84 (经度在前,纬度在后) - 示例: '{"type": "Point", "coordinates": [-75.343, 39.984]}' 或 '[-75.343, 39.984]'

radius: 圆的半径
    - 类型: float
    - 描述: 圆的半径值
    - 示例: 5.0

options: 可选参数配置
    - 类型: str (JSON 字符串) 或 None
    - 可选字段:
        - steps: 圆的边数 (默认: 64)
        - units: 距离单位 (默认: 'kilometers')
            - 有效值: 'miles', 'nauticalmiles', 'kilometers', 'meters', 'yards', 'feet', 'inches'
        - properties: 传递给圆形多边形的属性对象
    - 示例: '{"steps": 32, "units": "miles", "properties": {"name": "circle"}}'

Returns: str: JSON 字符串格式的圆形 GeoJSON Polygon 特征 - 类型: GeoJSON Feature with Polygon geometry - 格式: {"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "Polygon", "coordinates": [...]}} - 示例: '{"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "Polygon", "coordinates": [[[-75.35, 39.99], [-75.34, 39.99], ...]]}}'

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 >>> center = '{"type": "Point", "coordinates": [-75.343, 39.984]}' >>> options = '{"steps": 32, "units": "miles"}' >>> result = asyncio.run(circle(center, 5.0, options)) >>> print(result) '{"type": "Feature", "geometry": {"type": "Polygon", "coordinates": [[[-75.35, 39.99], [-75.34, 39.99], ...]]}}'

Notes: - 输入参数 center 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) - steps 参数控制圆的平滑度,值越大圆越平滑 - 依赖于 Turf.js 库和 Node.js 环境

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
centerYes
radiusYes
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: the tool generates a circular polygon, depends on Turf.js and Node.js, raises exceptions for execution failures/timeouts/input errors, and returns a GeoJSON Polygon feature. It covers behavioral aspects like coordinate system (WGS84), input format requirements (valid JSON strings), and output format details. No contradictions with annotations since none exist.

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 details in the Notes section (e.g., dependency on Turf.js/Node.js) could be integrated more tightly. Overall efficient with minimal waste, though slightly verbose in parameter examples.

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 (3 parameters, geometric operations), no annotations, and an output schema exists (though not detailed in context), the description provides excellent completeness. It covers purpose, detailed parameter semantics, return format with examples, error conditions, usage notes, and dependencies. This fully compensates for the lack of annotations and schema descriptions.

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 extensive parameter details beyond the basic schema: center requires GeoJSON Point or coordinate array with format examples and coordinate order; radius is a float value; options includes optional fields (steps, units with valid values, properties) with defaults and examples. This adds significant semantic meaning not present 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 as '根据中心点和半径创建圆形区域' (create a circular area based on center point and radius), which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'transformation_buffer' or 'transformation_convex' by focusing specifically on circular polygon generation with geometric parameters.

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 (e.g., '可以控制圆形的平滑度和单位' - can control circle smoothness and units) but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'transformation_buffer' for buffering operations or 'grid_hexGrid' for grid generation. No explicit when-not-to-use guidance or named alternatives are provided.

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