SiteCheck Jobs & Property

SeLoger homes for sale or rent in a town: listing id

realestate_seloger

Read-only

SeLoger (France) homes for sale or rent in a town: listing id, title, price and price per m2 (EUR), rooms, bedrooms, area, floor, postcode, energy class, headline and description start, agency type and link; about 30 per page (pages 1-20), plus total count and the town's average price per m2 with 1- and 5-year change. From seloger.com via a residential proxy. Related tools on this server, for a different need: realestate_estately when you need US homes for sale from Estately for a city: per listing; realestate_zoopla when you need Zoopla homes for sale or to rent in an area: headline. 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": {
      "place": "<place>"
    },
    "name": "realestate_seloger"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Results page 1 to 20 (default 1)
`type`	No	achat (for sale) or locations (to rent); default achat
`place`	Yes	Town slug as in seloger.com/immobilier/achat/immo-<place>/, e.g. paris-75, lyon-69, bordeaux-33

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld annotations it discloses concrete behavior: roughly 30 results per page, pages 1–20, total count, an average price per m2 with 1- and 5-year change, and the seloger.com residential-proxy source. It also states the billing model ($0.002 USDC per successful call via x402, failures not charged), which is operational context an agent cannot get from annotations.

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?

It is front-loaded with purpose and coverage, then alternatives, then price, which is a sensible order. However, it is a single densely semicolon-chained sentence whose field enumeration partially duplicates the output schema, and the payment clause adds length without aiding selection for most calls.

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?

Given three simple parameters, a full output schema, and readOnly/openWorld annotations, the description covers what is needed to call it correctly: geography, pagination limits, result volume, and cost. The return-field list is somewhat redundant with the output schema but does not leave gaps.

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 the schema already documents page, type and place; this establishes a baseline of 3. The description adds only the page-size/pagination detail (~30 per page, pages 1–20) and never mentions the type parameter's achat/locations values, so it does little beyond what the structured fields already convey.

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 names a specific data source and geography (SeLoger, France, homes for sale or rent in a town), and enumerates the fields returned plus pagination and aggregates. It explicitly distinguishes itself from realestate_estately (US) and realestate_zoopla (area-level), so an agent can separate it from those siblings without opening the schemas.

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 states the use case (a town's for-sale/rental listings) and routes to two named alternatives for different needs (Estately for US, Zoopla for area listings). It stops short of explicit exclusions among the many other French/European siblings such as realestate_bienici_real_estate or realestate_immowelt, so the when-not guidance is incomplete.

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?