geospatial-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

coord_convert

Read-onlyIdempotent

Convert any coordinate notation to all common formats at once: decimal degrees, DMS, USNG/MGRS, UTM, geohash, H3, Plus Code, quadkey, GeoJSON. Input format auto-detected.

Instructions

Convert a position between every common coordinate notation at once.

Detects the input format automatically and returns decimal degrees, DMS, USNG/MGRS, UTM, geohash, H3, Plus Code, quadkey and GeoJSON together, so one call answers any "what is this in X?" question.

Use this for format conversion. For a different datum or projection (British National Grid, State Plane, Web Mercator) use coord_transform_crs. To check whether a string is a valid coordinate without converting it, use coord_describe.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`location`	Yes	A position in any supported notation: decimal degrees '48.8584,2.2945'; DMS '48°51'30"N 2°17'40"E'; USNG/MGRS '31UDQ4825211954'; geohash 'u09tunquc'; H3 '891fb46741bffff'; Plus Code '8FW4V75V+9R6'; or a place name to geocode.
`tile_zoom`	No	Web-map zoom for the quadkey.
`grid_digits`	No	Digits in the USNG/MGRS reference: 10 gives 1 m, 8 gives 10 m, 4 gives 1 km.
`h3_resolution`	No	H3 resolution.
`geohash_length`	No	Geohash characters.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`meta`	Yes
`input`	Yes
`formats`	Yes
`detected_format`	Yes
`input_precision_m`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it auto-detects input format, returns a comprehensive set of notations, and accepts place names for geocoding. These are traits not evident from annotations or schema alone.

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 well-structured: it opens with the core purpose, explains the auto-detection and output scope in the second sentence, and then delivers usage guidance concisely. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (multi-format conversion), the presence of an output schema, and annotations covering safety, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains the auto-detection, lists output formats, includes geocoding capability, and routes to alternatives, leaving nothing an agent needs to call it correctly.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions (e.g., grid_digits precision mapping, location examples). The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 converts a position between all common coordinate notations, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming coord_transform_crs for datum/projection conversion and coord_describe for validation, making its unique role obvious.

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?

Explicitly provides when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, naming two alternatives (coord_transform_crs and coord_describe) with clear conditions for each. This fully removes ambiguity about tool selection.

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