Skip to main content
Glama

Fcc

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Census Block

census_block
Read-onlyIdempotent

Resolve a US latitude/longitude (decimal degrees) to its Census block, county, and state FIPS codes and names. Returns the 15-digit block FIPS, 5-digit county FIPS, 2-digit state FIPS, state code/name, and a bounding box. Pairs with the US Census API (FIPS codes are its join keys). Coordinates outside the US yield null FIPS values.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latYesLatitude in decimal degrees (e.g. 38.8976).
lonYesLongitude in decimal degrees (e.g. -77.0365).
censusYearNoCensus vintage for the block geography: "2020" (default) or "2010".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "lat": 38.8976,
+    "lon": -77.0365
+  },
+  {
+    "censusYear": "2010",
+    "lat": 40.7128,
+    "lon": -74.006
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. The description adds that null FIPS are returned for non-US coordinates. This is useful but could mention API dependency or rate limits.

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?

Three sentences, each with distinct value: purpose, output details, and external integration/edge case. No wasted words.

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 simplicity, annotations, and thorough schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: input, output, edge case, and external API context. No output schema needed since return values are explained.

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 already documents all parameters. The description does not add significant parameter-level detail beyond clarifying decimal degrees, which is already in the schema.

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 resolves lat/lon to Census block, county, and state FIPS codes and names, listing specific output fields. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'census_area' and 'county_for_point' by its scope.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description mentions the tool is for US coordinates and pairs with the US Census API, and notes that coordinates outside the US yield null. However, it does not explicitly exclude other census tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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

All Fcc toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Several tools cluster around the same core purpose: the three ask_pipeworx variants, the three census reverse-geocoders, and the six Polymarket analysis tools. Descriptions are detailed enough to disambiguate most choices, but ask_pipeworx_beta is currently identical to ask_pipeworx, creating genuine ambiguity. An agent could easily select the wrong tool in these overlapping families.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names mix verb-initial actions (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, resolve_entity) with noun-initial compound names (census_block, entity_profile, polymarket_edges). The polymarket_* family is internally consistent, but the set as a whole lacks a uniform verb_noun convention. Single-word verbs like remember, recall, and forget further break the pattern.

Tool Count2/5

At 34 tools, this exceeds the 'too many' threshold of 25 and includes clear redundancy: ask_pipeworx_beta duplicates ask_pipeworx, county_for_point is a thin wrapper over the same service as census_area/census_block, and scan_competitor_ai_presence just loops ai_visibility_check. The broad scope does not justify this many tools, and the set would be better split into focused servers.

Completeness4/5

Each sub-domain has solid lifecycle coverage: memory has remember/recall/forget, subscriptions have subscribe/list/unsubscribe/recent_alerts, and company research has resolve_entity/entity_profile/compare_entities/recent_changes. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct pipeworx:// citation-fetching tool), but no critical dead ends that would cause agent failures.

Resources