UK Business Tools - Ledgerhall

prop_property_yield

Read-only

Gross rental yield for a UK postcode.

Combines Land Registry sale comps (median sale price) with Rightmove rental listings (median monthly rent) to produce a gross yield percentage.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`months`	No	PPD sale lookback period (default 24).
`postcode`	Yes	UK postcode (e.g. "NG1 2NS").
`search_level`	No	PPD search granularity — "postcode", "sector" (default), or "district".	sector
`auto_escalate`	No	Compatibility parameter. Does NOT widen the search area on the live source (see `warnings`); previously postcode→ sector→district. Default True. Set False for strict-locality only.
`property_type`	No	Filter sales by type. None (default) = residential set (F+D+S+T). Pass "F"/"D"/"S"/"T"/"O" for one type, "ALL" for firehose.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context about the methodology: combining median sale prices with median monthly rents. It does not detail limitations or edge cases, but the readOnlyHint covers the main safety profile.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. The main purpose is stated up front, and the supporting sentence adds the crucial data-source and calculation context efficiently.

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 the rich input schema, complete parameter descriptions, and existing output schema, the description provides sufficient context about what the tool computes and from which sources. It could improve by naming the closest sibling tools, but nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters including the nuanced auto_escalate behavior. The tool description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema provides, which fits the baseline for full schema coverage.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly identifies the output (gross rental yield percentage) and the resource (UK postcode), and specifies the two data sources used. It distinguishes itself from sibling transaction/listing tools by describing the combined approach, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies when to use the tool: when a gross yield estimate for a postcode is needed, leveraging Land Registry and Rightmove data. However, it provides no explicit exclusions or mention of alternative sibling tools such as prop_rental_analysis or prop_property_comps.

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?