PersonIQ

Search properties in an area

search_properties

Filtered property LIST search over a city, ZIP, county or FIPS code, returning up to 100 rows. Does NOT accept a street address — use lookup_property for a specific address. Costs 2 credits per search — page size is free, additional pages cost 2 credits each.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "search_properties"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`zip`	No
`city`	No
`fips`	No	County FIPS code.
`limit`	No	Up to 100. Page size is free — the provider bills per call, not per row.
`state`	No	Two-letter state code.
`county`	No
`format`	No	Rendering of the human-readable text channel. "prose" (default) is a compact summary an agent can reason over; "json" repeats the data verbatim; "report" is a formatted Markdown report to show a person; "html" is a standalone HTML document for saving, printing or PDF. Machine-readable structuredContent is always included either way.
`offset`	No
`quickFilter`	No	Named investor filter, e.g. "absentee_owner", "high_equity".
`idempotencyKey`	No	Optional. Pass the same value when retrying a call that may have already succeeded, and you will not be charged twice.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes
`apiVersion`	Yes
`disclaimer`	Yes
`balanceNotice`	No
`suggestedNext`	No
`criminalCaveat`	No
`notConsumerReport`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds real behavioral context the annotations do not: the 100-row cap and a per-call credit cost with a free page size and 2 credits per additional page. The readOnlyHint=false annotation is implicitly explained by the credit charge, so there is no contradiction, though the description never explicitly says the call is billable/mutating in that sense.

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?

Three tight sentences, each carrying a distinct fact: scope, the excluded case with a redirect, and the cost model. The scope and cap are front-loaded before the billing detail.

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?

Return values are covered by the output schema and safety by annotations, so the core is adequate. For a 10-parameter tool with zero required parameters, though, the description omits how paging interacts with offset/limit, what quickFilter accepts, and whether a filter is mandatory — gaps an agent would hit in practice.

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 60%, and the description only maps the geography parameters and the limit cap; offset-based paging cost is implied but not spelled out. It says nothing about quickFilter named investor filters, the format rendering choice, or idempotencyKey, all of which are only documented in the schema.

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 and resource ("Filtered property LIST search") plus the accepted geography keys (city, ZIP, county, FIPS) and the row cap of 100. It also names the sibling it is not (lookup_property) for address-level queries, so an agent can distinguish it from lookup_property and unlock_property_by_address without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly states the negative case — no street address — and routes that case to lookup_property, which is exactly the kind of routing guidance most definitions lack. It does not say which geography key to prefer when several are valid, nor that at least one geographic filter is needed given zero required parameters.

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

All PersonIQ 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?