immobilier

quittance_loyer

QUAND le loyer a été PAYÉ et que le locataire demande sa quittance — jamais avant encaissement (art. 21). Génère une quittance de loyer conforme (art. 21 loi 89-462), HTML imprimable (PDF via POST /api/v1/documents/quittance). TOUJOURS mis en page pour ENVELOPPE À FENÊTRE : destinataire à DROITE, sans libellé dans la fenêtre. Utilisez locataire_adresse (postale : rue + CP + ville) distincte de logement_adresse (bien loué). Garde-fou : refus si pas de code postal 5 chiffres.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lieu`	No
`loyer`	Yes
`charges`	No
`periode`	Yes	ex. 01/07/2026 au 31/07/2026
`bailleur_nom`	Yes
`date_paiement`	Yes
`locataire_nom`	Yes
`bailleur_adresse`	No
`logement_adresse`	Yes	Adresse du bien loué (corps du document). Sert de repli postal si locataire_adresse absente.
`locataire_adresse`	No	Adresse POSTALE du locataire (fenêtre d'enveloppe) — ex. "12 rue de la Paix\n75002 Paris". Prioritaire.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses layout for window envelopes, address usage distinction, and validation rule (postal code). Does not mention side effects or authorization.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with key condition and purpose. Includes legal reference, layout, and guardrail in a structured way. Slightly dense but each sentence adds value.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Covers many behavior aspects and a validation rule. Lacks output format details (though mentions PDF via API). Does not explain all required fields; only emphasizes addresses. Moderate completeness given no output schema.

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 coverage is low (30%). Description adds meaning for 'locataire_adresse' vs 'logement_adresse' (postal vs property address, fallback). Other parameters (e.g., 'lieu', 'loyer') are not elaborated. Partial compensation.

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 states it generates a rent receipt ('Génère une quittance de loyer') referencing the relevant law. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings, but the verb+resource is specific.

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?

Clear when to use: after payment and tenant request ('QUAND le loyer a été PAYÉ... jamais avant encaissement'). Also mentions a guardrail (refusal if no 5-digit postal code). No explicit when-not or alternatives.

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

All immobilier 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

B3.2/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly distinct by purpose (e.g., quittance_loyer vs relance_impaye, or relance_facture_client vs relance_impaye). A few pairs like bon_intervention and fiche_mission could cause confusion, but detailed descriptions help resolve ambiguity.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names mix French and English, and use inconsistent patterns: some are noun-based (annonce_location, quittance_loyer), some verb-based (decide_campagne, obtenir_cle_api), and the cao_* tools use a prefix convention. Still readable but not uniform.

Tool Count2/5

41 tools is excessive for most servers, even one covering real estate and CAD. While the breadth is justified by multiple subdomains, the sheer number makes the surface hard to navigate and suggests possible over-fragmentation.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range: rental lifecycle (annonce, EDL, quittance, relance), owner reporting, artisan documents, fiscal synthesis, CAD generation and verification, outreach, and guides. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct tenant/property CRUD), but for a document-generation server it is quite complete.

Resources

Need Help?