Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

GISDB

by io.gisdb
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_property_assessment

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get retained county assessment observations and source provenance for a supported address or parcel ID. Missing facts stay unavailable; commercial source area is not finished living area. Any comparison is a draft with evidence holds and does not establish personal tax savings or filing readiness.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "address_or_pidn": "<address_or_pidn>"
    },
    "name": "get_property_assessment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressNoAlternative alias for property street address
county_keyNoOptional exact registered county adapter key, such as hamilton. Restricts lookup to that county and avoids unrelated county scans; conflicting explicit prefixes are rejected.
actual_sqftNoOptional: Actual measured living area in sq ft
address_or_pidnYesFull street address or county parcel ID (e.g. '3731 Anderson Ave, Chattanooga, TN' or '157I L 001')
notice_appraised_valueNoOptional: New proposed appraised value from reassessment notice

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the description rightly spends its words elsewhere. It adds genuine behavioral context: missing facts remain unavailable rather than being inferred, commercial source area is not finished living area, and any comparison is a draft with evidence holds that does not establish tax savings or filing readiness.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and each sentence carries a distinct constraint (availability, area semantics, non-advisory status). Slightly dense phrasing in the third sentence, but nothing is redundant filler.

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?

For a read-only, five-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what comes back (observations plus provenance) and, importantly, what the data does not mean. It does not state how unsupported counties or missing parcels are surfaced, which is the main residual gap.

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 100%, so all five parameters, including county_key with its conflict-rejection rule, are already documented in the schema. The description only restates the address-or-parcel-ID input axis and adds no syntax or format detail beyond it, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get retained county assessment observations and source provenance,' and names the lookup keys (address or parcel ID). This clearly separates it from audit/lookup siblings in spirit, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied through 'for a supported address or parcel ID' and the caveats about what the result is not. There is no explicit when-to-use versus when-to-use-something-else guidance against siblings such as audit_property_tax or lookup_property_tax, so the agent must infer routing.

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

All GISDB toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources