It measures roughly 1.7 metres by 1.5 metres, rests at an angle against a townland boundary wall, and is supported on its southern side by a single upright stone. Whether that arrangement is ancient human work or simply a quirk of geology remains genuinely unresolved. Archaeologists have been unable to classify it with certainty, and the possibility that it is a glacial erratic, a boulder deposited by retreating ice and later propped by someone for reasons unknown, has not been ruled out.

What gives the site its particular interest is the relationship between the boulder and the wall. The structure leans against the boundary rather than sitting squarely on it, which suggests it was already in place before the wall was built around it, and that the wall-builders incorporated the stone into the townland boundary rather than disturb it. That sequence of decisions, if that is what they were, implies the stone was considered significant enough to work around. A megalithic tomb, the broader category covering prehistoric stone burial monuments, sits just two metres to the south and has been recorded separately, though it too remains unclassified. The proximity of the two structures raises obvious questions that the available evidence cannot answer.