No surface remains were visible when satellite imagery was captured between 2011 and 2013, and what may be left is likely little more than a scrub-covered earthwork, detectable only if you know exactly where to look and catch the light at the right angle on Google Earth. For a monument class that once numbered in the tens of thousands across Ireland, the near-total disappearance of an individual example is not unusual. What makes this particular site worth noting is the gap between what the maps once recorded and what the ground now holds.

A ringfort, sometimes called a rath, was a roughly circular enclosure defined by an earthen bank and ditch, used as a farmstead or settlement during the early medieval period, broadly from around the fifth to the twelfth centuries. The Ordnance Survey's six-inch map of 1840 annotated this site and a companion enclosure nearby as the 'Knockannaskeagh forts', depicting two circular earthworks sitting either side of a field boundary. The pair evidently made enough of an impression to earn a name. By the time the twenty-five-inch Ordnance Survey edition was produced in 1897, the site was recorded as a raised semi-circular area, roughly fifteen metres on its longer axis and eight metres on the shorter, defined partly by a scarp and partly by a curving field boundary. A possible second ringfort still lies immediately to the west, catalogued separately in the record as LI047-075001. The site itself sits in pasture approximately 220 metres south of the road marking the townland boundary with Tobernea East.

For anyone wanting to locate it, the townland of Garranekeagh in County Limerick is the starting point, with the boundary road between Garranekeagh and Tobernea East providing the nearest fixed reference. The site lies roughly 220 metres south of that road, set in agricultural land. Given that no upstanding remains were confirmed in recent satellite imagery, a visit would be more rewarding for those with an interest in landscape archaeology than for anyone expecting a clearly defined earthwork. Comparing the 1840 and 1897 Ordnance Survey maps with current aerial imagery gives a clearer sense of how much has been lost, and the western companion site may offer marginally more visible evidence of the pair that cartographers once considered worth naming together.