Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ceny-nieruchomosci-mcp

ceny-nieruchomosci-mcp

by ContentWriterco
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Parcel check (Poland): zoning, utilities, flood, protection, prices

parcel_report
Read-only

Retrieve comprehensive public data for any Polish land parcel—register details, zoning, utility networks, flood and nature hazards, and nearby plot prices—by parcel ID, address, or coordinates.

Instructions

Everything public about one land parcel (działka) in Poland: parcel id, area and land-use class from the land register (EGiB), local zoning plan (MPZP) and zoning symbol, utility networks on or near the plot (water, sewer, gas, power, heat, telecom – GESUT), flood hazard (ISOK maps), nature protection areas (GDOŚ) and plot prices nearby (RCN). query: parcel id "302109_4.0001.100", "obręb number" like "Bnin 100" or "obręb Bnin działka 100 gmina Kórnik", an address "Kórnik, Poznańska 1" (the parcel under the address point) or "lat,lon".

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": "parcel_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesParcel id, 'obręb number', address or 'lat,lon'
pricesNoInclude plot prices nearby (default true)
communeNoGmina / powiat name to pick the right parcel when 'obręb number' matches several

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.2

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds valuable provenance — that the answer is aggregated across six separate Polish registries — which hints at breadth and possible partial availability of sources, but it never says what happens when a source is missing, latency, or what the response shape looks like.

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?

One dense but well-ordered passage: content inventory first, then the accepted query forms with examples last. Every clause carries information; the parenthetical registry acronyms justify their space by signalling data provenance.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully lists the result categories, and with 100% schema coverage the two optional parameters need no restating. Minor gaps: it says nothing about the prices=false toggle semantics or how the commune disambiguation is applied, though the schema covers both adequately.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond the schema's bare 'Parcel id, obręb number, address or lat,lon' by giving literal syntax examples ('302109_4.0001.100', 'Bnin 100', 'obręb Bnin działka 100 gmina Kórnik', 'Kórnik, Poznańska 1', 'lat,lon') and by clarifying that an address resolves to the parcel under the address point.

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 names a concrete resource (one land parcel in Poland) and enumerates exactly what the report contains — register data (EGiB), zoning (MPZP), utilities (GESUT), flood (ISOK), nature protection (GDOŚ) and prices (RCN). The verb is implicit ('report'), but the resource is unmistakable. It doesn't explicitly separate itself from the sibling property_prices even though prices appear as one section here.

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?

It spells out the four acceptable query shapes with concrete examples, which is genuine invocation guidance. However, there is no statement of when to prefer this over property_prices or find_address, and no exclusions — the agent must infer that this is the all-in-one parcel look-up.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools