geospatial-data-discovery
Skill76 starsChanged 45 days agoMITView on GitHub
Find and assess authoritative geospatial datasets or catalogs against known requirements: coverage, feature meaning, access, license, completeness, versions and reproducible pinning. Use for public sources, STAC/Portolan catalogs and read-only discovery of user data. Route joint source/compute/storage/delivery architecture to open-map-stack; do not turn a bounded lookup into a full analysis project.
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- esmailhussien/terraprooftheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- jaakla/openmapstack-skillsword for word, first seen Sep 28, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- jaakla/openmapstack-skills★ 76100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- esmailhussien/terraproof★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository13 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- neon-ai-gatewaySkill
- neon-authSkill
- neon-functionsSkill
- neon-object-storageSkill
- neon-postgres-branchesSkill
- neon-postgres-egress-optimizerSkill
- neon-postgresSkill
- neonSkill
- open-map-stackSkill
- reproducible-gis-projectSkill
- spatial-sqlSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 19
Read references/data-sources.md for public sources and STAC/Portolan catalogs.
- Distinctive: line 28
Prefer the authoritative provider for the requested meaning.
- Distinctive: line 34
Check coverage and completeness using provider counts, pagination, catalog structure, partitions and spatial/temporal filters as applicable.
- Very specific: line 48
When the user has dlt, Dagster, dbt, QGIS or Observable in their stack, read references/established-stack.md for ownership and integration …
- Very specific: line 55
Use references/formats-and-crs.md when inspecting coordinate systems, formats or spatial extents.
- Distinctive: line 62
When source choice depends on unresolved compute placement, continental scale, team concurrency or delivery architecture, keep those …
- Very specific: line 67
No project template, worked example or OpenMapStack CLI is needed for a source assessment.
- Distinctive: line 73
Keep GIS correctness and the task boundaries above when using a companion.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Geospatial data discovery
Find data that answers the user's question, and show what is known about its fitness. Dataset names, convenient APIs and plausible-looking geometries are not evidence that the features have the intended meaning.
Discover and assess
- Establish the area, time/version, feature semantics, necessary attributes, resolution, completeness and intended use. Ask only for consequential missing requirements; record assumptions that are safe to proceed with.
- Read
references/data-sources.mdfor public sources and STAC/Portolan catalogs. For the user's warehouse/database, readreferences/user-data-sources.md; use credentials by reference and read-only inspection. Snapshot materialization follows the existing authorization boundary. Before presenting current availability, coverage or licensing as verified, open the provider's actual metadata/download/license pages during this task. Reference notes are discovery leads, not evidence of a fresh lookup. Cite the pages checked and the check date; if access is unavailable, label the recommendation unverified and state what is missing. - Prefer the authoritative provider for the requested meaning. Verify fields and code lists against current provider metadata (report unavailable access): ownership, active status, eligibility and missing values must not be inferred from a generic category. Preserve unknowns as unknown. Official status alone does not prove that every alternative derives from that source or is less current; support comparative claims with evidence.
- Check coverage and completeness using provider counts, pagination, catalog structure, partitions and spatial/temporal filters as applicable. Distinguish a sample from a complete extract and a partial catalog from absent data.
- Identify a reproducible version or immutable snapshot, access method,
retrieval time and license/attribution requirements. A URL containing
latest, a filename or a retrieval date alone is not an immutable pin; retain snapshot bytes and their content hash when the source is mutable. Report unresolved license or retention constraints without inventing terms or promising a future rerun.
Return a concise source assessment: provider/dataset, authoritative link, coverage/time, relevant fields and predicates, access/pin strategy, completeness evidence and material limitations. Compare alternatives when they change the answer; do not download an entire dataset just to establish its existence.
When the user has dlt, Dagster, dbt, QGIS or Observable in their stack, read
references/established-stack.md for ownership and integration boundaries.
Preserve their chosen tools; retain source pins, GIS correctness and reproducible
evidence. Do not duplicate their SQL, ingestion or scheduler definitions.
Boundaries and resources
Use references/formats-and-crs.md when inspecting coordinate systems, formats
or spatial extents. A bounded discovery answer does not require project.yaml,
a canonical pipeline or presentation artifacts. If the user asks for the
actual multi-stage analysis, use an installed open-map-stack or
reproducible-gis-project, or explain the needed next step; do not label a
source assessment as a completed material analysis.
When source choice depends on unresolved compute placement, continental scale, team concurrency or delivery architecture, keep those coupled decisions with the generalist. Do not choose an engine merely because a dataset is easy to query with it.
No project template, worked example or OpenMapStack CLI is needed for a source
assessment. If the task expands into a project, hand off the source assessment
to an installed open-map-stack or reproducible-gis-project. No sibling skill
or third-party installation is required for bounded discovery.
For optional product expertise, read references/companion-skills.md.
Keep GIS correctness and the task boundaries above when using a companion.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

