The result is a large sub-rectangular enclosure, roughly ten metres north to south and twelve metres east to west, that reads as much as a feat of pragmatic engineering as deliberate design.

The walls that do survive are in reasonably good condition, reaching approximately one and a half metres in height on the eastern side, with visible signs of repair work at some point in their history. That detail alone suggests the structure was considered worth maintaining, used across a long enough span of time to require attention. Perhaps most intriguing is an internal division: a north to south wall runs parallel to the eastern face, set about three metres inward, with an opening at its centre. This kind of internal subdivision is fairly common in enclosures associated with agricultural or pastoral use, the opening allowing movement between one section and another, perhaps separating animals, storing goods, or organising some activity that required distinct but connected spaces. A hut site lies roughly fifteen metres to the west, suggesting this enclosure was not a standalone feature but part of a small cluster of structures, the remnants of a working place rather than a monument.