google-maps-mcp-server

reverse_geocode

Convert geographic coordinates (latitude/longitude) to a street address. Specify coordinates and optional result type filter.

Instructions

Convert geographic coordinates (latitude/longitude) to a street address.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "lat": "<lat>",
      "lng": "<lng>"
    },
    "name": "reverse_geocode"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lat`	Yes	Latitude
`lng`	Yes	Longitude
`result_type`	No	Filter by result types (e.g., ['street_address', 'route'])

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.1Jun 8, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits like accuracy, coordinate system support, output format, or error handling. Minimal transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence, 8 words, front-loaded with the core action. No wasted words, perfectly concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, the description should explain the return value. It only says 'to a street address', leaving format unclear. Also lacks usage context among sibling tools, making it incomplete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it merely mentions coordinates and street address without elaborating on parameters.

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 converts geographic coordinates to a street address, using specific verbs and resources. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like geocode_address, which does the reverse.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as geocode_address or search_places. The description lacks context about prerequisites or preferred use cases.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server