Skip to main content
Glama

find_address

Read-onlyIdempotent

Looks up a street address with a house number and town or postcode, returning its coordinates and OpenStreetMap data at that point for other tools.

Instructions

Looks up a street address and returns its coordinate, plus what OpenStreetMap holds under it. Use when the person gives a STREET AND NUMBER — "Hauptstraße 12, Fulda" — for the point, or to see what is mapped there. The coordinate passes to any other tool as lat/lon. Do NOT use for a town/district/station name alone (find_place) or a company/shop/landmark by name (find_poi) — needs a street and a number. At most 5 results; more than one means the door is mapped twice, not that the address is ambiguous. OpenStreetMap ODbL 1.0; show the attribution line.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoHow many results to return (1–5, default 3) — more than one means the same address carries more than one OpenStreetMap object.
queryYesA street address, as a person writes one: street and house number, plus a town or postcode — "Hauptstraße 12, 36037 Fulda" or "Hauptstraße 12, Fulda". Both orders work. A street and number with neither a town nor a postcode cannot be placed (the same street name exists in about two thousand German towns) and is refused.
languageNoSet this on every call to the language the person is writing in: "en" if they wrote English, "de" if they wrote German. Do not leave it out because it has a default — the default is only the fallback when the language is genuinely unclear, and an English question answered in German is a wrong answer. Place names, station names and road numbers are never translated in either language; in English the German term is kept in parentheses so the person recognises it on signs and in local apps.de

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.7.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / query / maxLength
      Added value: +160
  2. Addedv1.4.8

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower; the description adds genuinely non-obvious traits: a hard cap of 5 results, the interpretation that multiple hits mean a doubly-mapped door rather than ambiguity, and an attribution obligation (ODbL 1.0 line). It does not discuss failure modes or rate limits, but the added context is substantive.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and then the routing rules; every sentence carries information (trigger, exclusions, result semantics, license). It is dense but not padded, though the license sentence is a slight tail appendage.

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

Completeness5/5

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

No output schema exists, and the description covers the return (coordinate plus OSM objects), the cardinality behavior, and the attribution requirement, so an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3; the description still adds value by explaining that the query must carry a town or postcode to be placeable, that both field orders work, and that `language` must be set explicitly rather than left to its default. These are behavioral constraints the schema states only partially.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('looks up a street address and returns its coordinate, plus what OpenStreetMap holds under it') and explicitly distinguishes itself from find_place and find_poi by input shape. An agent can select it without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives positive triggers (street AND number given, or to see what is mapped there) and explicit exclusions routed to named siblings: town/district/station name alone → find_place, company/shop/landmark → find_poi. It also states the coordinate can be passed to any other tool as lat/lon.

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