Skip to main content
Glama

payotte-mcp

by io.github.Payotte-com
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Échéance pour contester son évaluation foncière / Property-assessment appeal deadline (Canada)

fenetre_revision
Read-onlyIdempotent

Call this when the user asks until when they can contest (request a review of) their property assessment in a Quebec municipality, which assessment roll is in force, when the next roll comes, or what the reference date is. Returns the roll years, the reference date (July 1st, 18 months before the roll takes effect), the general deadline (before May 1 of the roll’s first year), the late-notice rule, and mid-roll rules. Compiled by Payotte from the official Quebec rolls (MAMH open data). For other provinces, pass province (e.g. "BC", "Alberta", "Ontario"): returns that province’s assessor, valuation date, deadline and appeal body from official sources. Tell the user their assessment notice prevails. Does not say whether an assessment is too high.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
provinceNoProvince code or name (BC, AB, SK, MB, ON, QC, NB, NS, PE, NL). Default: Quebec (then `municipalite` is used).
date_avisNoOptional: mailing date printed on the assessment notice (YYYY-MM-DD), to apply the 60-day late-notice rule.
municipaliteNoQuebec municipality, e.g. "Drummondville", "Gatineau", "Montréal" (not needed outside Quebec).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / municipalite / description
      Previous value: -"Quebec municipality, e.g. \"Drummondville\", \"Gatineau\", \"Montréal\"."New value: +"Quebec municipality, e.g. \"Drummondville\", \"Gatineau\", \"Montréal\" (not needed outside Quebec)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / province / description
      Previous value: -"Optional; only Quebec is covered."New value: +"Province code or name (BC, AB, SK, MB, ON, QC, NB, NS, PE, NL). Default: Quebec (then `municipalite` is used)."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "municipalite"
-]New value: +[]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this a safe read-only, idempotent, non-open-world lookup, so the safety profile is covered. The description then adds real value beyond the annotations: data provenance (Payotte, MAMH open data; official sources for other provinces), the caveat that the assessment notice prevails, and the exact rule set returned.

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?

The trigger condition is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by return values, provenance, and scope limits. It is somewhat dense across three sentences, but each clause carries distinct information and none is wasted.

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 compensates by enumerating the returned fields (roll years, reference date, general deadline, late-notice and mid-roll rules). For a zero-required-parameter lookup tool this is complete enough for an agent to call and interpret it correctly.

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 all three parameters (`province`, `date_avis`, `municipalite`) are already documented, including the late-notice rule link for `date_avis`. The description reinforces the Quebec default and the province-code behavior but adds little syntax or format detail the schema does not already carry — the expected baseline of 3.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource — determining the deadline window to contest a property assessment — and enumerates exactly what it returns (roll years, reference date, general deadline, late-notice rule, mid-roll rules). The closing line 'Does not say whether an assessment is too high' cleanly separates it from valuation/estimation siblings like estimer_economie.

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?

It gives explicit trigger conditions ('when the user asks until when they can contest...which assessment roll is in force, when the next roll comes'), covers the out-of-Quebec case via `province`, and states a boundary (not for judging whether an assessment is too high). It stops short of naming an alternative sibling tool for that out-of-scope question.

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

All payotte-mcp 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