GIS MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_utm_crs

Retrieve the UTM coordinate reference system (CRS) for any geographic coordinates. Provide latitude and longitude to obtain the appropriate UTM zone and projection parameters for accurate mapping and analysis.

Instructions

Get UTM CRS for given coordinates.

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": {
      "coordinates": "<coordinates>"
    },
    "name": "get_utm_crs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`coordinates`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.0Jan 2, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / coordinates / title
```
Removed value: -"Coordinates"
```
removedInput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"get_utm_crsArguments"
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedAug 19, 2025

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits. It fails to mention error handling, return format, or any constraints, leaving the agent without critical information.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is extremely short (5 words). While concise, it sacrifices necessary detail. It is not front-loaded with essential information such as coordinate format or output specification.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Despite having an output schema, the description does not indicate what the tool returns. For a simple tool with one parameter and no annotations, it should specify coordinate order and expected output. It fails to provide even minimal context.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the coordinates parameter (e.g., order: [longitude, latitude] or [easting, northing]?). It adds no meaning beyond the bare type definition.

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 retrieves the UTM CRS for given coordinates. It uses a specific verb (Get) and resource (UTM CRS), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_crs_info and get_available_crs.

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 (e.g., get_geocentric_crs, get_crs_info). There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context about input requirements.

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

Deploy Server