local-maps-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

在系统地图中搜索

search_map

Searches for places or addresses in macOS Maps and opens the app to initiate the search, without requiring a Maps API key.

Instructions

在这台 Mac 的系统地图（Apple 地图）中搜索地点或地址。当用户要求在地图里搜索、查找或打开某个地点时使用。此工具只打开系统地图并发起搜索，不会读取搜索结果，也不能确认地点是否存在或地图是否已经显示完成。

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_map"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	要搜索的地点名称或地址，例如“杭州西湖”。去掉首尾空格后不能为空。

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

在没有 annotations 的情况下，它说明了一个关键的行为事实：该工具只打开系统地图并发起搜索，不会读取搜索结果，也不能确认地点是否存在，或地图是否已经显示完成。这在有副作用的操作中，是很有价值的预期管理。但它没有说明所需的 macOS 自动化权限，也没有说明地图应用无法启动时会发生什么。

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?

三句话，先说明用途，再说明何时使用，最后说明限制，没有一句多余的废话。关键限制部分放在末尾，前面的说明已经足够清楚。

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?

只有一个参数，没有 annotations，也没有 output schema，description 已经说明了主要风险：无法确认搜索结果。对于一个打开应用并执行搜索的工具，还缺少 macOS 自动化权限，以及地图未安装或未运行时的失败行为。

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 的说明覆盖率是 100%，而且 query 的 schema 已经写明了“地点名称或地址”以及“去掉首尾空格后不能为空”的约束。description 没有给 query 增加任何语义，因此适用基线 3 分。

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?

用具体的动词和资源说明了动作：在“这台 Mac 的系统地图（Apple 地图）”中搜索地点或地址。正文还点出了工具名的范围，明确这不是一个通用的网络搜索工具。

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?

明确给出了触发条件：当用户要求“在地图里搜索、查找或打开某个地点”时使用。由于不存在同类工具，所以不需要排除其他替代选项；不过它既没有说明要避开的近似场景（例如“获取路线”），也没有说明前置条件。

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

search_mapA