UK Business Tools - Ledgerhall

prop_property_comps

Read-only

Comparable sales from Land Registry Price Paid Data.

Defaults return the standard residential set:

property_type=None means residential (F+D+S+T). Pass "F"/"D"/"S"/"T"/"O" for a single type, or "ALL" to disable type filtering (firehose).
transaction_category defaults to "A" (standard sales). Pass None to include category-B (bulk transfers, non-standard conveyances).
filter_outliers=False by default; set True for IQR-trimmed stats AND transaction list (1.5*IQR rule, needs >=4 prices).

limit caps returned transactions (max 200). enrich_epc attaches EPC floor area and price-per-sqft to each transaction — slower but richer.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`limit`	No
`months`	No
`address`	No
`postcode`	Yes
`enrich_epc`	No
`search_level`	No	sector
`property_type`	No
`filter_outliers`	No
`transaction_category`	No	A

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses IQR filtering behavior ('1.5*IQR rule, needs >=4 prices'), the max limit of 200 transactions, and the slower/richer trade-off of enrich_epc.

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?

The description is well-structured with bullet points, no redundant sentences, and front-loads the main purpose.

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?

The description provides sufficient context for a 9-parameter tool with output schema, covering defaults, key parameter semantics, and performance trade-offs. It omits a few parameter explanations (months, search_level) but overall enables correct invocation.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Given 0% schema coverage, the description adds essential semantics for property_type (codes F/D/S/T/O/ALL), transaction_category (A vs B), filter_outliers (IQR rule), limit (max 200), and enrich_epc. It does not explain months, address, or search_level, but these are either self-evident or less critical.

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?

The description clearly states 'Comparable sales from Land Registry Price Paid Data.' and details default behaviors, distinguishing it from sibling tools like prop_ppd_transactions by focusing on the comparable sales use case.

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?

It provides clear defaults ('Defaults return the standard residential set') and explains how to modify property_type, transaction_category, filter_outliers, limit, and enrich_epc. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or when-not-to-use conditions.

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

All UK Business Tools - Ledgerhall 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

A4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Tools are well-grouped by domain prefixes (dd_, gov_, law_, prop_) with clear descriptions that differentiate them. However, there is minor overlap, e.g., dd_search could be used instead of individual searches, and dd_fetch versus dedicated profile tools might cause confusion.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with domain-specific prefixes (dd_, gov_, law_, prop_). Names are descriptive and predictable, e.g., dd_charity_search, gov_govuk_search, law_bills_search_bills.

Tool Count4/5

70 tools is high but justified by the broad scope covering due diligence, government, legal, and property domains. Each domain has a reasonable number of tools (about 15-20 each). The count is on the upper end but still manageable.

Completeness5/5

The tool set is comprehensive across all domains: full CRUD for companies and charities, detailed legal research (cases, legislation, parliament, citations), property data (EPC, planning, price paid, rentals), and government information. No obvious gaps for the intended use cases.

Resources

Need Help?