CreditLabs

estimate_ptz

Estimation PTZ en 2026, sur une commune INSEE, selon ressources N-2, type de bien, coût, primo-accession et résidence principale. Ne confirme jamais une éligibilité.

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": {
      "codeInsee": "<codeInsee>",
      "nombrePersonnes": "<nombrePersonnes>",
      "revenusFiscauxReference": "<revenusFiscauxReference>",
      "coutOperation": "<coutOperation>",
      "typeLogement": "<typeLogement>",
      "premiereAcquisition": "<premiereAcquisition>",
      "residencePrincipale": "<residencePrincipale>"
    },
    "name": "estimate_ptz"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`codeInsee`	Yes
`coutTravaux`	No	Travaux inclus dans le coût total, obligatoire pour l'ancien.
`typeLogement`	Yes	neuf_collectif, neuf_individuel ou ancien_travaux
`coutOperation`	Yes
`nombrePersonnes`	Yes
`autresPretsDeuxAns`	No	Somme des prêts complémentaires d'au moins 2 ans, facultatif.
`premiereAcquisition`	Yes
`residencePrincipale`	Yes
`revenusFiscauxReference`	Yes
`performanceEnergetiqueValidee`	No	Justificatif de classe D ou meilleure avant/après travaux, nécessaire pour l'ancien.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the result is an estimate that 'ne confirme jamais une éligibilité', which sets expectations for the output, but says nothing about permissions, determinism, return shape, or what assumptions underlie the calculation.

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?

Two sentences: purpose and scope front-loaded, followed immediately by the key behavioral caveat. No filler, and each sentence contributes information the agent needs.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a ten-parameter calculation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers the input side reasonably but never says what the tool returns (a computed PTZ amount, a breakdown, eligibility indicators?) or how conditional requirements like travaux/DPE apply. That leaves meaningful 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 only 40%, so the description needs to compensate. It names roughly six of the ten inputs (commune INSEE, N-2 income, property type, cost, first-time purchase, primary residence), but leaves nombrePersonnes, coutTravaux, autresPretsDeuxAns and performanceEnergetiqueValidee unaddressed here, relying on partial schema text.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Estimation PTZ en 2026') with the scope narrowed to a commune identified by code INSEE and the determining factors. It does not name or distinguish itself from siblings such as get_ptz_zone, so it stops short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is for producing a PTZ estimate from a full set of borrower/property inputs. There is no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no guidance on when not to call it beyond the eligibility disclaimer.

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

All CreditLabs 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?