hel
Server Details
Instant pricing for French land-registry documents (etat hypothecaire, deeds). Read-only, no auth.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.4/5 across 4 of 4 tools scored.
Each tool targets a distinct purpose: service pricing, order links, profession-based routing, and subscription fees. No overlap in functionality.
All tool names follow the same pattern: 'hel-' prefix followed by French verb-noun descriptors (e.g., devis-public, orienter-commande, orienter-service, tarifs-abonnements), ensuring predictability.
With 4 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose of providing information and orientation for HEL services. Not too few or too many.
The tools cover the main informational queries (pricing, order links, subscription fees, and service orientation by profession). Missing transactional or user-specific tools, but these are likely out of scope.
Available Tools
4 toolshel-devis-publicDevis public (tous niveaux)ARead-onlyInspect
Donne le PRIX (coût, tarif, « combien coûte ») d'un service HEL : tarif public et tarifs réduits par niveau d'abonnement (Public, Essentiel, Privilège, Intégral). Lecture seule, sans authentification, sans donnée personnelle. Pour l'état hypothécaire (ehf), le prix total = un honoraire forfaitaire par niveau + des débours refacturés (12€/élément, 7€ en Alsace-Moselle pour Privilège/Intégral) calculés selon type_recherche et le nombre d'éléments. Fournis type_recherche et les nombres (nb_parcelles / nb_lots / nb_personnes) pour un devis EHF exact ; sans eux, seul l'honoraire forfaitaire est estimé (débours non calculés). Plafonds : 12 parcelles, 12 lots, 3 personnes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| nb_lots | No | EHF en copropriété : nombre de lots (max 12). | |
| service | Yes | Service HEL : ehf, acte, rcp, edd, verif_mandat, pre_etat_date, pack_propriete, pack_rcp, pack_edd, rdv_analyste, analyse_ia, situation_patrimoine, recherche_proprietaire. | |
| copropriete | No | EHF : true si le bien est en copropriété (on dénombre les lots au lieu des parcelles). | |
| nb_parcelles | No | EHF, recherche cadastrale/combinee : nombre de parcelles (max 12). | |
| nb_personnes | No | EHF, recherche identite/combinee : nombre de personnes physiques + morales (max 3). | |
| type_combinee | No | EHF, requis si type_recherche=combinee. ciblee = recherche à l'intersection (débours forfait 12€ + 2€/élément au-delà de 5). | |
| type_recherche | No | EHF uniquement : base de la recherche au SPF. cadastrale = par parcelles (ou lots si copropriété) ; identite = par personnes ; combinee = les deux. | |
| localisation_bien | No | Commune avec code postal (ex. "34000 Montpellier"). NON requise pour le tarif public d'un état hypothécaire : le prix public est identique partout. Requise pour les packs et situation_patrimoine ; pour les abonnés, elle affine les débours en Alsace-Moselle. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds transparency by explaining the pricing computation (honoraires + débours) and constraints like plafonds. This complements the annotations well.
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 moderately concise, with focused sentences that each add value. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. Minor redundancy could be trimmed, but overall efficient for the complexity.
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?
Given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, 2 enums, EHF-specific logic) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: pricing logic, required inputs for exact vs. estimate, plafonds, and special cases like Alsace-Moselle. No gaps remain.
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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant context beyond the schema, such as the meaning of débours for EHF, how type_recherche and counts affect the estimate, and the plafonds. This provides deeper understanding for parameter usage.
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 clearly states it provides the price (cost, tariff) for HEL services with public and reduced rates per subscription level. The verb 'Donne le PRIX' and the specificity of services make the purpose unambiguous.
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?
The description explains when to use the tool (for price quotes) and provides detailed guidance for EHF: providing type_recherche and counts for exact quote, or honoraria only. It also notes that it's read-only and requires no authentication. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like hel-tarifs-abonnements.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
hel-orienter-commandeOrienter vers un service / une commandeARead-onlyInspect
Fournit les LIENS de page d'un service HEL : 'page_service_url' (page de présentation du service) et 'commande_directe_url' (formulaire de commande). N'effectue aucun calcul et ne renvoie aucun montant : pour un prix ou un devis chiffré, ce n'est pas cet outil. Services pris en charge : état hypothécaire, copie d'acte de vente, situation de patrimoine, règlement de copropriété, état descriptif de division, pré-état daté, packs, recherche de coordonnées propriétaire, vérification de mandat, RDV analyste, analyse IA, recherche de référence cadastrale. URL officielles exactes ; le paiement se fait sur le site.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| service | Yes | Service / document souhaité (texte libre). Ex. : état hypothécaire, copie d'acte, situation de patrimoine, règlement de copropriété, état descriptif de division, pré-état daté, pack propriété, pack règlement copropriété, pack EDD, recherche coordonnées propriétaire, vérification de mandat, RDV analyste, analyse IA, référence cadastrale. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds beyond this by stating it performs no calculations, returns only URLs, and notes that payment happens on the site. This provides valuable behavioral context not captured by annotations.
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 well-structured: first sentence states core purpose, then adds exclusions and supported services. It is front-loaded and each sentence serves a purpose. Slightly verbose with the long list but still efficient. Score 4.
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?
Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, output schema exists), the description is complete. It explains the two URLs in the output, lists all supported services, and clarifies constraints. No gaps remain for an agent to correctly select and invoke the tool.
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?
The input schema has one parameter with a description that covers the concept, but the tool description adds significant value by listing all supported services explicitly (état hypothécaire, copie d'acte, etc.). This enriches the parameter's meaning beyond the schema's description.
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 clearly states the tool provides page links for a HEL service, specifying exactly what it returns (presentation page URL and order form URL) and what it does not (no calculations/prices). It lists supported services, making the purpose unambiguous and distinct from potential siblings.
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?
The description provides explicit when-not-to-use guidance: 'pour un prix ou un devis chiffré, ce n'est pas cet outil' (for a price or quote, this is not the tool). While it doesn't directly name a sibling alternative, the exclusion is clear and the context suggests other tools handle pricing. This is sufficient for a 4.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
hel-orienter-serviceOrienter vers la page de serviceARead-onlyInspect
À partir de la profession du prospect (avocat, banque, courtier, syndic, agent ou agence immobilière, commissaire de justice / huissier, assurance, géomètre-expert, énergies renouvelables / solaire / éolien, marchand de biens, promoteur), renvoie l'URL de la page de service HEL adaptée — où le client découvre le service, souscrit son abonnement et passe commande. Pour un particulier ou une profession non listée, renvoie la page des tarifs professionnels. Renvoie l'URL officielle exacte de la page de service correspondante (présentation, tarifs, souscription et commande). Le paiement se fait sur le site.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| profession | Yes | Profession du prospect (texte libre). Valeurs typiques : Agents immobiliers, Assurances, Avocats, Banques & Courtiers, Commissaires de justice, Énergies renouvelables, Géomètres-experts, Marchands de biens, Promoteurs & autres, Syndics, Autre/particulier. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true (safe, no side effects) and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful context: the returned URL leads to a page covering presentation, subscriptions, and orders; payment is handled on-site. This reveals behavioral traits beyond the annotations, such as the URL's purpose and that no action is performed besides fetching.
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 extremely concise: three sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core action ('returns the URL of the appropriate HEL service page'), then adds fallback and details. Every sentence earns its place, making it easy for an AI agent to parse quickly.
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 a simple mapping tool with one parameter, the description is complete. It covers the primary behavior (profession-to-URL mapping), fallback logic, what the target page contains, and payment info. The existence of an output schema means return format details are handled elsewhere, so the description's coverage is sufficient.
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 coverage is 100%, with the input parameter 'profession' well-described in the schema (typical values listed). The description adds minimal extra meaning—it repeats the typical values and explains the free-text nature. Thus, the schema already carries the semantic burden; the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond what the schema provides.
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 clearly states the tool's function: it returns the URL of a HEL service page based on the prospect's profession. It specifies the mapping, fallback for unlisted professions, and the purpose of the page (presentation, tariffs, subscription, order). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like hel-devis-public (public quote) and hel-tarifs-abonnements (pricing) by focusing on service page orientation.
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?
The description implies usage for finding the correct service page, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions a fallback for individuals or unlisted professions, providing a boundary. However, no guidance is given on when not to use it or which sibling tool to choose for specific scenarios.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
hel-tarifs-abonnementsTarifs des abonnementsARead-onlyInspect
Renvoie la grille des tarifs d'abonnement HEL (mensuel et annuel HT, conditions d'engagement) par niveau : Public, Essentiel, Privilège, Intégral. Aucun paramètre. Lecture seule, sans authentification ni donnée personnelle. Répond aux questions sur le coût des abonnements sans devis de service.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds value beyond annotations by explicitly stating the tool is read-only, requires no authentication, and handles no personal data. Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint, but the description confirms these behaviors in plain language, which helps an AI agent understand constraints.
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?
Two sentences, no wasted words. The description is front-loaded with the primary purpose and efficiently covers all key aspects: what it returns, subscription levels, usage context, and constraints. Every sentence adds value.
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?
Given zero parameters, comprehensive annotations, and existence of an output schema (implied), the description is fully adequate. It covers the return content, usage scenario, and behavioral traits. No gaps remain for an AI agent to select or invoke the tool correctly.
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?
With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage (empty schema), the description does not need to explain parameters. The baseline score of 4 applies because the tool has no parameters and the description correctly states 'Aucun paramètre'.
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 clearly states the tool returns a grid of HEL subscription prices (monthly/yearly HT, engagement conditions) by level (Public, Essentiel, Privilège, Intégral). It uses a specific verb 'Renvoie' and resource 'grille des tarifs', and the purpose is distinct from sibling tools which appear to handle different tasks like quotes or ordering.
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?
The description indicates the tool is for answering questions about subscription costs without a service quote, and notes it has no parameters and is read-only without authentication. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the context is clear and the zero-parameter nature makes misuse unlikely.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!