property-search

Search UK homes with one plain-English query

search

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search live OpenMoov homes for sale or to rent with one plain-English query, e.g. "3 bed house in Folkestone under £350k with a garden" or "flats to rent CT20". Name a town or UK postcode. Understands sale/rent, bedrooms, price limits, property type (flat, house, detached, semi-detached, terraced, bungalow) and garden, parking, garage, new build, chain free and pet friendly. Returns up to 12 results, each with an id to pass to fetch, a one-line title and its openmoov.co.uk url. Made for clients that use the standard search and fetch tools (ChatGPT deep research); search_properties takes the same filters as separate arguments.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	What the person is looking for, in their words, including the place

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`results`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real behavior: a 12-result cap, the shape of each result (id, one-line title, url), and the fact that ids feed into fetch. It does not address empty-result or ambiguous-query behavior, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose and examples, with the sibling routing placed at the end. The facet enumeration and property-type list are dense but each item earns its place by telling the agent what the query string can express.

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?

For a one-parameter, annotated, output-schema-bearing search tool this is fully sufficient: it covers intent, input form, result count, result fields, and downstream handoff to fetch. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly on the first attempt.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single query parameter, but the description goes well beyond it by enumerating the facets the parser understands (sale/rent, bedrooms, price limits, property type, garden, parking, garage, new build, chain free, pet friendly) and by requiring that a town or UK postcode be named. That is directly actionable guidance for composing the value.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource — "Search live OpenMoov homes for sale or to rent" — and immediately grounds it with two realistic query examples. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by naming search_properties (same filters, separate arguments) and pointing to fetch for the returned ids.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It states the intended caller profile ("clients that use the standard search and fetch tools (ChatGPT deep research)") and explicitly contrasts with search_properties as the structured-filter alternative. The routing decision between the two tools is inferable without opening either schema.

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

All property-search 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?