Skip to main content
Glama

Estimate Property Value

estimate_property_value
Read-only

Get an automated valuation (AVM) for a property — low / mid / high price range.

Use find_property_comparables instead if you want the raw comparable transactions with similarity scores. estimate_property_value returns only the AVM summary (low/mid/high range).

REQUIRED: latitude, longitude, surface

Optional:

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

  • pieces: Number of rooms

  • code_postal, commune: Optional administrative fallback when GPS comparables are sparse

  • radius_m: Search radius (100–2000m, default: 500)

  • max_age_months: Max transaction age (1–24, default: 18)

Returns:

  • price_range: { low, mid, high } in euros

  • price_per_m2: { median, used_surface }

  • confidence: "high", "medium" or "low": how much the retained comparables agree on price/m² (dispersion (P75-P25)/median: high <15%, medium 15-50%, low >=50%). Measured on 1,957 masked DVF sales: median error 12% / 20% / 30%. It is not a probability of accuracy: even at "high", half of the outcomes fall outside price_range.

  • confidence_basis: "comparable_agreement" — names what confidence measures.

  • based_on_count: number of comparables used

  • interval: { method, coverage_label, basis, cohort, cohort_eligible_n, ratio_low, ratio_high, contract_version, calibration_generated_at } — how price_range was derived.

  • confidence_factors: { comparable_count, average_similarity, fallback_used, positive_factors[], limiting_factors[] } — what strengthens or limits the estimate.

Returns estimate: null with a message if fewer than 3 comparables are found. Tip: increase radius_m or max_age_months to get more data.

Note: the low/high range is a data-calibrated 50% interquartile interval (P25/P75 of observed-price / published-mid, backtest-measured on 2,000 masked DVF sales), not a fixed percentage. Its width is driven first by how much the retained comparables agree on price/m² — the dispersion cohort, (P75-P25) / median, e.g. interval.cohort = "dispersion=<15%" — then by comparable density, property type and surface band, and it widens to the global cohort when a segment lacks enough measured data (interval.basis). Agreeing or contradicting comparables also surface as confidence_factors comparables_agree / comparables_disagree. The mid value is unaffected by any of this. DVF data covers 2014–2025 (annual cadence). Use max_age_months ≥ 12 for reliable results.

Cost: 10 credits per call

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
piecesNoNumber of rooms (±1 tolerance applied to comparables)
communeNoCommune fallback when GPS comparables are sparse
surfaceYesSurface area in m²
latitudeYesGPS latitude of the target property
radius_mNoSearch radius in meters (default: 500)
longitudeYesGPS longitude of the target property
type_localNoProperty type (default: Appartement)
code_postalNoPostal code fallback when GPS comparables are sparse
max_age_monthsNoMax age of comparable transactions in months (default: 18 — DVF updates semi-annually)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint=false. The description goes far beyond: it discloses cost (10 credits per call), the exact null-return condition (<3 comparables), and a detailed interpretation of the confidence field including the caveat that even 'high' confidence has half of outcomes outside the range. This is unusually rich behavioral context.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Front-loaded well with purpose, alternative, and required params before the deep methodology. However, the sections on interval calibration, masked DVF backtests, and dispersion cohorts are dense and arguably excessive for a tool description, inflating length beyond what an agent needs to invoke it.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must carry return semantics — and it does, enumerating every returned field (price_range, price_per_m2, confidence, interval, confidence_factors, based_on_count), the null case, and the credit cost. Nothing needed to interpret results is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter including defaults and ranges. The description largely restates them (type_local default, radius_m 100-2000 default 500, max_age_months 1-24 default 18) rather than adding new semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Get an automated valuation (AVM) for a property') plus the exact output shape ('low / mid / high price range'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling find_property_comparables, so an agent can route correctly without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Names the alternative tool and the condition that selects it ('if you want the raw comparable transactions with similarity scores'). Also gives failure handling ('Returns estimate: null... Tip: increase radius_m or max_age_months') and a reliability threshold ('Use max_age_months >= 12 for reliable results').

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources