SecureLend Market

compare_personal_mortgages

Read-only

Search SecureLend's lender database for residential mortgage offers (purchase or refinance) matching the user's criteria (property value, loan amount, credit score, state, loan type). Returns available rates, terms, estimated monthly payments, and closing cost indicators from participating lenders. Results may change over time and may include offers from SecureLend’s database and authorized third-party integrations when enabled. The user selects a lender and is directed to complete their application on the lender's own platform.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`state`	No	The state where the property is located (2-letter code).
`loanType`	Yes	The type of mortgage loan.
`homePrice`	No	The purchase price of the home in USD.
`loanAmount`	Yes	The desired mortgage loan amount in USD.
`creditScore`	No	The applicant's estimated credit score (500-850).
`downPayment`	No	The amount of the down payment in USD.
`propertyType`	No	The intended use of the property.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`offers`	Yes
`summary`	Yes
`metadata`	Yes

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already mark readOnly and openWorld; the description adds context that results may change over time, may come from third-party integrations, and that the user is redirected to the lender's platform for application. This goes beyond the structured hints and sets expectations for non-deterministic, externally sourced data.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four sentences, front-loaded with action and scope, followed by returns, caveat, and next step. No redundant filler; all sentences contribute to understanding the tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given output schema and full annotation coverage, the description covers purpose, return contents, variability, third-party sources, and post-search workflow. It could mention exclusions (e.g., unsupported states), but the existing schema and annotations make the description sufficiently complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for all 7 parameters. Description restates selected parameters (property value, loan amount, credit score, state, loan type) but doesn't add new semantics beyond the schema or explain relationships like how downPayment affects offers. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly identifies the tool as searching SecureLend's lender database for residential mortgage offers (purchase or refinance) and enumerates returned data (rates, terms, payments, closing costs). It distinguishes from siblings like compare_business_mortgages via 'residential' and 'personal' wording.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

States when to use: when the user wants residential mortgage offers (purchase or refinance) and describes the follow-up workflow to the lender's platform. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for business mortgages or other loan types, but the 'residential' scope implies the boundary.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All SecureLend Market tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear, distinct purposes, but there are a few potentially confusing pairs. Compare_personal_banking and compare_savings_accounts overlap somewhat, and calculate_loan_payment could be mistaken for covering mortgages despite calculate_mortgage_payment existing. Overall, descriptions help resolve most ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern throughout: compare_* for comparisons, calculate_* for calculations, display_* for forms, submit_* for submissions, and get_* for offers. All names use lowercase with underscores, creating a predictable and uniform naming scheme.

Tool Count4/5

With 22 tools, the count is on the higher side but appropriate given the broad financial marketplace domain. Each tool covers a specific product category or workflow step, so the size feels justified rather than bloated. It is slightly heavy but not excessive for the scope.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers comparison, calculation, lead generation, prequalification, document upload, and status tracking, forming a comprehensive marketplace workflow. Minor gaps exist, such as no tools for updating or canceling applications, but these are workarounds and the core user journey is well supported.

Resources

Need Help?