Skip to main content
Glama
Evlek

Evlek — Northern Cyprus Property MCP Server

Official
by Evlek
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Compare Northern Cyprus Cities Side-by-Side

compare_cities
Read-only

Compare live asking-price aggregates across 2-4 Northern Cyprus cities, for sale or rent. See descriptive listing facts to inform property decisions.

Instructions

Compare source-dated live active-listing asking-price aggregates across 2-4 Northern Cyprus cities. Descriptive listing facts only; not transaction prices, valuation, forecast, ranking, or investment advice.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoSale or rent (default: sale)
citiesYesCities to compare (2-4)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYes
citiesYes
dataAsOfYes
dataSourceNo
isEstimateNo
metricTypeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed9 schema fields changedv2.1.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / cities / items / description
      Added value: +"Slug, Turkish name, or exonym (Kyrenia/Nicosia/Famagusta/Morphou)."
    • removedInput schema / properties / cities / items / enum
      Removed value: -[
-  "girne",
-  "iskele",
-  "lefkosa",
-  "gazimagusa",
-  "guzelyurt",
-  "lefke"
-]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / cities / items
      Added value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "activeCount": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "city": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "hasData": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "lowSample": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "medianPrice": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "medianPricePerSqm": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "p25Price": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "p75Price": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "provenance": {
+      "properties": {
+        "agencies": {
+          "type": [
+            "number",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "maxAgencyShare": {
+          "type": [
+            "number",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "publishers": {
+          "type": [
+            "number",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "singleSource": {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "publishers",
+        "agencies",
+        "maxAgencyShare",
+        "singleSource"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "slug": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "topDistrict": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "topDistrictMedianPrice": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "withheldReason": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "slug",
+    "city",
+    "activeCount",
+    "hasData"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / dataAsOf
      Added value: +{
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / dataSource
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedOutput schema / properties / generatedAt
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / isEstimate
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / metricType
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "type",
+  "dataAsOf",
+  "cities"
+]
  2. First observedv1.6.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by specifying that it returns source-dated live active-listing asking-price aggregates and descriptive listing facts only, which clarifies the nature and limitations of the data beyond the annotations.

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 a single, tightly written sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then adds the important exclusions. Every element earns its place; there is no redundancy or filler.

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?

With annotations covering the read-only/destructive profile, a fully described input schema, an output schema present, and a description that states scope, data type, and exclusions, the description is complete for an agent to correctly select and invoke this tool. Return format is not needed because an output schema exists.

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 the input schema already documents both parameters. The description reinforces the 2-4 city constraint and the sale/rent context, but it does not add substantial meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate here.

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 states a clear verb ('Compare') and a specific resource ('source-dated live active-listing asking-price aggregates across 2-4 Northern Cyprus cities'). It also distinguishes itself from valuation, forecast, and investment tools by explicitly excluding those categories, making it easy for an agent to identify what this tool does.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: comparing city-level asking-price aggregates for 2-4 Northern Cyprus cities, for sale or rent. It also gives exclusions (not transaction prices, valuation, forecast, ranking, or investment advice). However, it does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools such as compare_properties or get_price_index, so the when-not-to-use guidance is present but not fully explicit.

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