Fetch Rightmove listings for a postcode.
listing_type: "sale" or "rent". sort_by: "newest", "most_reduced", "price_asc", "price_desc". Images are excluded from results.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| radius | No | ||
| sort_by | No | ||
| postcode | Yes | ||
| max_pages | No | ||
| max_price | No | ||
| listing_type | No | sale | |
| min_bedrooms | No | ||
| property_type | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / properties / keywordsRemoved value: -{
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ],
- "default": null
-}Input schema / properties / keywordsAdded value: +{
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ],
+ "default": null
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds one behavioral detail: 'Images are excluded from results.' This is useful and consistent with the annotation, but no other behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, rate limits, default behavior) are disclosed. The bar is lower due to annotations, and the description adds some context.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is brief and front-loaded with the main purpose. It wastes no words, but the inline parameter lists could be better structured. Overall, it is concise without unnecessary filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For an 8-parameter tool with zero schema description coverage, the description only touches on 2 parameters and lacks detail on behavior like pagination (max_pages), radius, and filtering. It also fails to clarify the relationship with the sibling prop_rightmove_listing. An output schema exists, but the description itself is still incomplete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains values for listing_type and sort_by, but the other 6 parameters (radius, max_pages, max_price, min_bedrooms, property_type) are not elaborated. The partial coverage is insufficient for a tool with 8 parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states the main purpose with a specific verb ('Fetch'), a resource ('Rightmove listings'), and a scope ('for a postcode'). However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool prop_rightmove_listing, which likely serves a similar or related purpose.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like prop_rightmove_listing. The description only lists parameter value options, not usage context, prerequisites, or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.