cesium-mcp

addGeoJsonPrimitive

Render GeoJSON as Cesium primitives for large browser datasets on a CesiumJS globe, adding layers from a URL, raw data, or stored resource.

Instructions

Render GeoJSON as Cesium primitives for large browser datasets. Returns { success: boolean, data?: unknown, message?: string, error?: string }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	Layer ID (auto-generated if omitted)
`url`	No	GeoJSON file URL (mutually exclusive with data)
`data`	No	GeoJSON object (mutually exclusive with url)
`name`	No	Layer display name
`show`	No	Whether to show (default true)
`sessionId`	No	Target browser session ID for multi-browser routing (optional)
`resourceId`	No	Stored GeoJSON resource ID (mutually exclusive with data or url)
`allowPicking`	No	Allow picking (default true, disable for better performance)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No
`error`	No
`message`	No
`success`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.139.22Oct 1, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / resourceId

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Stored GeoJSON resource ID (mutually exclusive with data or url)",
+  "maxLength": 200,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv1.139.19Aug 19, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {},
+    "error": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "success": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "success"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.139.18Aug 12, 2026
- removedInput schema / $schema
```
Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / data / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -{}
```
Changed8 schema fields changedv1.139.17Jul 29, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / data / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +{}
```
- addedInput schema / properties / data / type
```
Added value: +"object"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / id / maxLength
```
Added value: +200
```
- addedInput schema / properties / id / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```
- addedInput schema / properties / name / maxLength
```
Added value: +200
```
- addedInput schema / properties / name / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```
- addedInput schema / properties / url / maxLength
```
Added value: +4096
```
- addedInput schema / properties / url / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```
Addedv1.139.15Jul 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the return shape and performance context, but does not disclose side effects, scene mutation behavior, or idempotency details beyond what the annotations already provide.

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 two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The second sentence repeats return information already covered by the output schema, so it does not fully earn its place, but overall the structure is efficient.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With 100% schema coverage, existing annotations, and an output schema, the description gives enough context to invoke the tool correctly. Its main gap is not helping the agent choose between this and the sibling addGeoJsonLayer, but otherwise the necessary call context is present.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all eight parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, making the baseline of 3 appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: render GeoJSON as Cesium primitives, scoped to large browser datasets. It is clearly not a tautology. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling addGeoJsonLayer, so an agent must infer which one to choose.

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 phrase 'for large browser datasets' implies a usage context, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tool guidance. It does not name addGeoJsonLayer or explain when a primitive is preferable to a layer.

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