SiteCheck Jobs & Property

Recorded UK residential sale prices and dates for one

realestate_purplebricks_property

Read-only

Recorded UK residential sale prices and dates for one postcode, from HM Land Registry Price Paid Data (official open data, OGL). Historic sales only, not current listings; Purplebricks itself has no public API. Related tools on this server, for a different need: realestate_auction_com_property when you need HUD homes for sale by online bid in a US state or city; realestate_commercial_property_transactions when you need recently recorded NYC real-property documents. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

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": {
      "postcode": "<postcode>"
    },
    "name": "realestate_purplebricks_property"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	How many sales, 1 to 50 (default 10)
`postcode`	Yes	UK postcode, e.g. SE1 7PB

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	No
`sales`	No
`source`	No
`postcode`	No
`checkedAt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description adds material behavior the agent could not otherwise infer: the official OGL data provenance, that Purplebricks has no public API, a per-call price of $0.002 USDC via x402 with accepted chains, and that failed calls are free. The payment requirement is critical pre-invocation context and is stated plainly.

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-loads what the tool returns and its scope, then provenance, then alternatives, then cost — a sensible priority order with no filler. The pricing sentence is dense but earns its place; the related-tools sentence is slightly long relative to its routing value.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and the description covers provenance, scope, exclusions, cost, and payment mechanics. Minor gaps remain: no mention of how far back the Price Paid Data reaches or of the 50-record ceiling, both of which affect whether the tool fits a request.

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 both parameters (postcode, limit 1–50 default 10) are already documented in the schema. The description only reinforces the single-postcode scope; it adds no format, encoding, or edge-case detail beyond the structured fields, which is the expected baseline here.

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 (recorded UK residential sale prices and dates), narrows the scope to a single postcode, and names the underlying source (HM Land Registry Price Paid Data). It explicitly separates itself from listing-style siblings by saying 'Historic sales only, not current listings'.

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 exclusion ('historic sales only, not current listings') and routes two adjacent needs to named siblings (auction.com for US HUD homes, commercial_property_transactions for NYC documents). It does not point to a UK current-listings sibling such as realestate_zoopla or realestate_openrent_uk_listings, so the alternatives coverage is partial rather than exhaustive.

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

All SiteCheck Jobs & Property tools Inspect

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

Need Help?