不動産情報サービス MCP

不動産価格情報取得 / Real Estate Price Information

reinfolib-real-estate-price

Read-only

国土交通省の不動産情報ライブラリから不動産価格（取引価格・成約価格）情報を取得します。取引時期、地域（都道府県、市区町村、駅）などを指定して検索することが可能。市区町村コードは reinfolib-city-list ツールで取得できます。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`area`	No	都道府県コード: 北海道=01, 青森県=02, 岩手県=03, 宮城県=04, 秋田県=05, 山形県=06, 福島県=07, 茨城県=08, 栃木県=09, 群馬県=10, 埼玉県=11, 千葉県=12, 東京都=13, 神奈川県=14, 新潟県=15, 富山県=16, 石川県=17, 福井県=18, 山梨県=19, 長野県=20, 岐阜県=21, 静岡県=22, 愛知県=23, 三重県=24, 滋賀県=25, 京都府=26, 大阪府=27, 兵庫県=28, 奈良県=29, 和歌山県=30, 鳥取県=31, 島根県=32, 岡山県=33, 広島県=34, 山口県=35, 徳島県=36, 香川県=37, 愛媛県=38, 高知県=39, 福岡県=40, 佐賀県=41, 長崎県=42, 熊本県=43, 大分県=44, 宮崎県=45, 鹿児島県=46, 沖縄県=47
`city`	No	市区町村コード (5桁)
`year`	Yes	取引時期(年) (形式: YYYY)
`limit`	No	取得件数 (デフォルト: 10件)
`quarter`	No	取引時期(四半期) (1:1月〜3月, 2:4月〜6月, 3:7月〜9月, 4:10月〜12月)
`station`	No	駅コード (6桁)
`language`	No	出力結果の言語 (ja:日本語, en:英語)
`priceClassification`	No	価格情報区分コード (01:不動産取引価格情報, 02:成約価格情報)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	Yes	不動産価格情報リスト（値が空のフィールドは省略される）
`truncated`	Yes	true の場合、limit を超える結果が省略されている。limit の引き上げ（最大100）または quarter・city・station での絞り込みで全量を取得できる
`totalCount`	Yes	検索条件に該当した全件数
`returnedCount`	Yes	今回返した件数

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed6 schema fields changedJul 15, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / data / description

Previous value: -"不動産価格情報リスト"New value: +"不動産価格情報リスト（値が空のフィールドは省略される）"

removedOutput schema / properties / data / items / required

Removed value: -[
-  "Type",
-  "Region",
-  "MunicipalityCode",
-  "Prefecture",
-  "Municipality",
-  "DistrictName",
-  "TradePrice",
-  "PricePerUnit",
-  "FloorPlan",
-  "Area",
-  "UnitPrice",
-  "LandShape",
-  "Frontage",
-  "TotalFloorArea",
-  "BuildingYear",
-  "Structure",
-  "Use",
-  "Purpose",
-  "Direction",
-  "Classification",
-  "Breadth",
-  "CityPlanning",
-  "CoverageRatio",
-  "FloorAreaRatio",
-  "Period",
-  "Renovation",
-  "Remarks",
-  "PriceCategory",
-  "DistrictCode"
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / returnedCount

Added value: +{
+  "description": "今回返した件数",
+  "type": "number"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / totalCount

Added value: +{
+  "description": "検索条件に該当した全件数",
+  "type": "number"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / truncated

Added value: +{
+  "description": "true の場合、limit を超える結果が省略されている。limit の引き上げ（最大100）または quarter・city・station での絞り込みで全量を取得できる",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "data"
-]New value: +[
+  "totalCount",
+  "returnedCount",
+  "truncated",
+  "data"
+]

First observedFeb 9, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already convey read-only and open-world hints. The description adds the data source and notes that city codes come from a sibling tool, but it does not mention response format, pagination, or ordering. Given the good annotation coverage, the description provides some added context but not rich behavioral detail.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is three short, focused sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second lists search criteria, and the third gives a useful pointer to the city-list tool. No unnecessary words.

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?

For an 8-parameter read-only search tool with a rich schema and output schema, the description provides an adequate overview and the key prerequisite (city codes). It does not explain typical use cases or limit behavior, but the structured data fills the 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 description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are documented. The description adds a cross-reference for obtaining city codes and mentions search dimensions, but it does not detail parameter syntax or add meaning beyond what the schema already provides. This is the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves real estate price information from the Ministry of Land's Real Estate Information Library, specifying transaction and contract prices. It explicitly focuses on price data, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get-time and reinfolib-city-list.

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?

The description indicates the tool can search by transaction time and region, and points users to reinfolib-city-list for municipality codes, providing a helpful cross-reference. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or contrast with alternatives, but the usage context is clear.

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

All 不動産情報サービス MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?