Skip to main content
Glama

Look Up Property History

lookup_property_history
Read-only

Get transaction history for a specific address - essential for due diligence.

REQUIRED: One of these combinations:

  1. address + code_postal: "49 cours Richard Vitton" → sales at that number (one building). Without a number ("cours Richard Vitton") → the 50 most recent sales on the whole street. Full street types (cours, avenue, boulevard…) and bis/ter are understood.

  2. section + no_plan + code_commune: Cadastral parcel lookup

Returns:

  • Transactions, newest first (max 50), with scope = address | street | parcel

  • Each transaction includes an id field — pass it to get_building_characteristics for BDNB building data

  • Price, surface, type, rooms, buyer type for each

  • price_evolution: only for a repeat sale of the same property (same type, surface within 5%), otherwise null

  • No sale at the number: the numbers on that street that do have sales

Workflow: lookup_property_history → use transaction id → get_building_characteristics

Example by address: {address: "49 cours Richard Vitton", code_postal: "69003"}

Example by cadastral: {section: "AB", no_plan: "123", code_commune: "101"}

Cost: 20 credits per call, refunded when nothing is found

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressNoStreet address to search
no_planNoCadastral plan number
sectionNoCadastral section
code_postalNoPostal code (required with address)
code_communeNoDVF commune code — NOT the full 5-digit INSEE code. Strip the 2-digit department prefix and any leading zeros. Examples: Paris 16e → '116', Paris 1er → '101', Lyon 6e → '386', Nice → '88', Bordeaux → '63'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations: discloses cost (20 credits, refunded when nothing found), result cap (max 50, newest first), ordering, the scope field, a chaining id, and precise price_evolution semantics (null unless a repeat sale of a comparable property).

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 the purpose and the required combinations before returns and workflow, and uses headers/examples that scan well. It is somewhat long with a few overlapping return bullets (scope, id, fields) that could be tightened.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully carries the burden: it enumerates returned fields, ordering, cap, scope values, price_evolution edge cases, and the downstream chaining pattern. Nothing essential to invoke or interpret the call is missing.

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 per-parameter docs already exist, but the description adds the critical combination semantics that the schema's zero-required-params leaves ambiguous (address+code_postal vs. section+no_plan+code_commune) plus concrete examples. Some overlap with the schema's code_commune note.

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+resource ('transaction history for a specific address') and immediately clarifies scope modes (address vs. street vs. cadastral parcel). An agent can tell this is the address/parcel-level transaction lookup rather than the broader sibling 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 explicit required parameter combinations, explains the fallback behavior when no sale exists at a number, and provides a workflow chain to get_building_characteristics. It does not name sibling tools like search_property_transactions to explicitly route between alternatives, which is the only gap.

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