Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gov-gazetteer-mcp

gov-gazetteer-mcp

by ianderso
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

gov_object

Read-only

Retrieve every name, type, parent, date, and relation for one GOV object to trace a place's full historical record and administrative chain.

Instructions

Read one GOV object in full: every name, type and parent, each with its dates.

Names carry languages; part-of, located-in and represents relations are grouped by parent, current first, with dates and GOV's source ids. Notes are volunteers' text. For one year's chain use gov_place_at_date.

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": {
      "gov_id": "<gov_id>"
    },
    "name": "gov_object"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gov_idYesA GOV id (e.g. 'QUEURGJO51NT', 'object_289891'), its GOV page address, or an external id GOV records as 'system:ref' (e.g. 'geonames:2851465', 'wikidata:Q40623').
refreshNoAsk GOV again instead of the 30-day cache.
childrenNoAlso list the objects GOV records inside this one (a parish's villages).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral value beyond them: relation groups are ordered 'current first' with dates and GOV source ids, and 'notes are volunteers' text' warns about data provenance and quality — a caveat an agent cannot get from the schema. It stops short of describing pagination, failure modes, or how children alters the response payload.

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 key statement is front-loaded and the total length is three short blocks with zero filler. The telegraphic fragments ('Notes are volunteers' text.') and mid-sentence line breaks make it slightly choppy, but every sentence carries information.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must convey what comes back, and it does: names with languages, types, parents, dates, grouped relations with source ids, and notes. The main gap is that the effect of the children flag on the returned structure is never described, which matters for a tool whose payload shape changes.

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 the schema itself fully documents gov_id, refresh (30-day cache bypass) and children. The description adds nothing specific about refresh or children, and its ordering remarks concern output rather than inputs. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does all the parameter work.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource plus its scope: 'Read one GOV object in full: every name, type and parent, each with its dates.' It then enumerates the returned facets (names with languages, part-of/located-in/represents relations, notes), which distinguishes it clearly from the sibling gov_place_at_date, which it names explicitly.

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?

It gives an explicit alternative and the condition that selects it: 'For one year's chain use gov_place_at_date.' It does not say when a caller should use gov_search first to resolve an id, nor when the children flag overlaps with gov_enclosures, so guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools