What makes this place quietly odd is how difficult it is to read: the structure's boundaries dissolve into the natural rock and slope around it, so that distinguishing the work of human hands from the behaviour of the landscape requires patience and a certain willingness to look twice.

The site is identified as a possible cashel, a type of early medieval stone ringfort, roughly 22 metres in diameter on its north-south axis and subcircular in plan. A cashel differs from an earthen ringfort, or rath, in being defined primarily by a drystone wall rather than a bank and ditch; here, though, the two materials are mixed, with the most legible section being an earth and stone bank on the eastern side, about three metres wide and standing just under a metre in external height. Intermittent limestone uprights along the northern and southern arcs may represent the remnants of an outer revetment, a facing of upright stones that would once have given the wall a more formal, vertical edge. The interior is flat and raised, sitting roughly a metre above the surrounding ground. The monument sits within a relict field system, itself embedded within a larger multiperiod landscape of enclosures, suggesting that the cashel was part of a working agricultural world whose outlines have never entirely disappeared. The antiquarian Thomas Johnson Westropp may have recorded this very site in 1905, noting what he called "another fort of large blocks, but much broken," adjoining a ruined cottage, a description that fits the bothán and the battered stonework still visible today.