Skip to main content
Glama
mavrovde

ViaFrei

by mavrovde
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

find_place

Read-onlyIdempotent

Looks up a place name and returns every match, each with its kind, population, English name and coordinate; the official key (AGS/RS) only in the structured result.

Instructions

Looks up a place name and returns every match, each with its kind, population, English name and coordinate; the official key (AGS/RS) only in the structured result. Use when the person asks where somewhere is, when you need a coordinate for another tool, and above all to RECOVER after a tool reported a name as ambiguous — this is where you find out which Neustadt is which. Pass near to rank and separate same-named places by distance. Do NOT use to find a company, shop or landmark: call find_poi. At most 10 results, radius <= 200 km. Every result carries an attribution line to show the user.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latNoLatitude to measure from, instead of `near`.
lonNoLongitude to measure from, instead of `near`.
kindNoNarrow to one kind: "city", "district" (Kreis), "admin" (Land or Regierungsbezirk), "station", "stop", "motorway" or "junction". Omit unless the person was specific.
nearNoA second place to measure from, used to tell same-named candidates apart: "Neustadt" near "Hamburg" is one of twenty Neustadts. Every result then carries its distance from this point.
limitNoHow many candidates to return, best match first (1–10, default 5).
queryYesThe place name to look up, as the person said it — "Neustadt", "Munich", "Kreis Fulda", "Köln Hbf". English names and spellings without umlauts both work.
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: it defaults to German ("de"), which is only the fallback when the language is genuinely unclear, so an English question sent without it is answered in German — 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
radius_kmNoWhen near/lat+lon is given, keep only candidates within this many kilometres (1–200). Omit to rank by distance without dropping any.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.18
    • changedInput schema / properties / language / description
      Previous value: -"Set 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."New value: +"Set 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: it defaults to German (\"de\"), which is only the fallback when the language is genuinely unclear, so an English question sent without it is answered in German — 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."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.7.3
    • addedInput schema / properties / near / maxLength
      Added value: +120
    • addedInput schema / properties / query / maxLength
      Added value: +120
  3. 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 the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description still adds non-obvious behavior: a hard cap of 10 results, a 200 km radius ceiling, that the official AGS/RS key appears only in the structured result, and that every result carries an attribution line the agent must surface to the user. It does not describe ranking/tie-breaking or fallback behavior when nothing matches.

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 opening sentence front-loads purpose and payload, and the when-to-use, exclusion, and limit sentences each carry distinct information. It is longer than strictly necessary (the disambiguation point is stated twice, via `near` and via the Neustadt example), but nothing is padding.

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?

With 8 parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering only safety, the description supplies what the structured fields cannot: the result shape, the result cap, the radius ceiling, the attribution obligation, and the ambiguity-recovery workflow. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 the baseline is 3, and the schema already documents every parameter including the important `language` default trap. The description adds strategic framing rather than new syntax: it explains that `near` is the disambiguation lever for same-named places and reiterates the 10-result/200 km bounds, tying the parameters into one workflow.

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 ("Looks up a place name and returns every match") and enumerates the returned fields (kind, population, English name, coordinate, AGS/RS key). It explicitly contrasts itself with a sibling ("Do NOT use to find a company, shop or landmark: call find_poi"), so an agent can separate it from find_poi and find_address without opening a 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?

It gives three concrete trigger conditions (person asks where somewhere is, a coordinate is needed for another tool, recovering from an ambiguity error) plus an explicit exclusion routing to find_poi. The ambiguity-recovery role ("this is where you find out which Neustadt is which") is unusually actionable guidance.

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