It measures roughly three metres across and sits no higher than fifteen centimetres above the surrounding soil, ringed by a shallow ditch and a barely perceptible outer bank. A ring barrow, in general terms, is a burial monument consisting of a central mound enclosed by a ditch and bank, and this one is so modest in scale that its identity as a monument at all remains tentative. What draws attention to it is less its physical presence than its setting: the feature overlooks a small lake that formed only in recent decades, in ground that may have been prone to waterlogging for much longer, and it commands open views to the east and south-west while being sheltered by higher ground on every other side.

The broader area around this spot is demonstrably busy with ancient activity. Geophysical survey has detected a well-defined ring-ditch and a second possible one roughly sixty-five metres to the northwest, and an ancient roadway runs north to south just to the west of the barrow. The archaeologists R. A. S. Macalister and Robert Lloyd Praeger investigated this general area in 1928 and recorded a larger earthwork they considered identical in character to a ring barrow near the western summit of Uisneach. They dug a trench through it and found, as they put it, that it did not contain so much as a construction of stones. Their recorded dimensions for that earthwork, including a central mound diameter of 6.4 metres and a ditch width of 2.75 metres, suggest a monument more than twice the size of the one visible today, leading researchers to conclude that the two are likely separate features. Whatever Macalister and Praeger examined has since left no obvious trace above ground, which raises the quiet question of how many other monuments in this landscape have simply dissolved back into the hill.