Skip to main content
Glama
magiclane

Magic Lane MCP Server

Official
by magiclane

Geofence Manager

geofence_manager
Destructive

Create, manage, and query geofences for spatial monitoring. Check if locations are inside defined areas to trigger actions or track assets.

Instructions

Manage geofences and perform spatial queries for asset monitoring and location-based services.

Supports operations:

  • check_point: Test if locations are inside geofence(s) (uses CheckPointsInGeofencesSchema)

  • create: Define new geofence(s) with polygon, circle, or rectangle geometries (uses CreateGeofenceParametersSchema)

  • read: Retrieve geofences by IDs or within a bounding box (uses GetGeofencesParametersSchema)

  • update: Modify existing geofence properties (uses UpdateGeofenceParametersSchema)

  • delete: Remove geofence(s) by ID(s) (uses DeleteGeofenceParametersSchema)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
operationYesGeofence operation to perform. Exactly one of: "create": define new geofence(s); use CreateGeofenceParametersSchema. "read": fetch existing geofences by ID or area; use GetGeofencesParametersSchema. "update": modify metadata of an existing geofence; use UpdateGeofenceParametersSchema. "delete": remove geofence(s) by ID; use DeleteGeofenceParametersSchema. "check_point": test whether one or more points lie inside the given geofence(s); use CheckPointsInGeofencesSchema.
parametersNoOperation-specific parameters. MUST match `operation`: "create": CreateGeofenceParametersSchema; "read": GetGeofencesParametersSchema; "update": UpdateGeofenceParametersSchema; "delete": DeleteGeofenceParametersSchema; "check_point": CheckPointsInGeofencesSchema.
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive (destructiveHint: true) and not idempotent. The description adds operational details like 'delete' but does not elaborate on behavioral nuances (e.g., what happens on failure, rate limits, or side effects). It aligns with annotations without contradiction.

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?

The description is concise: two introductory sentences followed by a clear bullet list of operations. It front-loads the core purpose and uses efficient, scannable formatting. Every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (multiple operations, no output schema), the description is adequate but not exhaustive. It explains what the tool does and lists operations, but does not describe the return format or success/failure behavior. The rich input schema partially compensates.

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 fully documents all parameters. The description adds high-level operation names but no deeper semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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: managing geofences and performing spatial queries. It lists five specific operations (check_point, create, read, update, delete), each with a direct verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like interactive_map or route_planner, which serve different functions.

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 implicitly indicates usage through the listed operations, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives. No comparison to siblings or exclusion criteria are provided. The agent must infer from the tool's name and operation list.

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/magiclane/magiclane-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server