Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

normi

by io.github.NormiHQ
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Compare Locations

compare_locations
Read-only

Compare 2-5 neighborhoods side-by-side - perfect for investment location decisions.

REQUIRED:

  • locations: Array of 2-5 objects with {code_postal} or {commune}

Optional:

  • type_local: "Maison" or "Appartement" (default: Appartement)

  • date_debut: Start date (default: 1 year ago)

Returns per location:

  • Transaction count, median price/m², median price

  • Year-over-year price change

  • Rankings (cheapest, most expensive, highest volume, fastest growing)

Example: Compare Paris arrondissements by postal code: {locations: [{code_postal: "75011"}, {code_postal: "75020"}, {code_postal: "75019"}]}

Example: Compare cities by commune: {locations: [{commune: "LYON"}, {commune: "BORDEAUX"}, {commune: "NANTES"}]}

Note: DVF data covers 2014–2025 (annual cadence). Use date windows ≥ 12 months for reliable results.

Cost: 10 credits per call

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": {
      "locations": "<locations>"
    },
    "name": "compare_locations"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
locationsYes2-5 locations to compare
date_debutNoStart date (default: 1 year ago)
type_localNoProperty type (default: Appartement)Appartement

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world, so the description is only obligated to add operational context — and it does: cost of 10 credits per call, DVF data coverage 2014–2025 at annual cadence, and a warning to use windows ≥12 months for reliable results. It doesn't mention rate limits or what happens for postal codes with insufficient data, keeping it just below 5.

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?

Structured into Required, Optional, Returns, Examples, and Note sections, with the core purpose front-loaded in the first sentence. Every block carries information an agent needs; there is no filler prose.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Despite having no output schema, the description enumerates the return fields (transaction count, median price/m², median price, YoY change, four rankings), which an agent needs to interpret results. Combined with cost and data-coverage caveats, nothing essential is missing for a 3-parameter read tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% so the baseline is 3; the description earns more by revealing the either-or semantics of each location object ({code_postal} OR {commune}), which the schema does not enforce or explain, plus concrete example values. Defaults are merely restated from the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource with scope: 'Compare 2-5 neighborhoods side-by-side' for investment location decisions. The comparison/aggregation framing (rankings, YoY change) distinguishes it from single-location sibling tools like estimate_property_value or search_property_transactions.

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?

Gives a clear use case ('perfect for investment location decisions') and two worked examples showing the postal-code vs commune modes, which is effectively when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All normi 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