Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

compass-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Compare Compass properties side-by-side

compass_compare_properties
Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare 2-25 Compass properties side-by-side, fetching full facts (extracted features included) even if some targets fail. Accepts URLs or listing IDs, returns per-row results for re-running pending ones.

Instructions

Fetch 2 or more Compass properties and align their facts side-by-side. Each target may supply url (a full Compass homedetails URL or path) or listing_id_sha alone — sha-only targets fetch /listing//view, which redirects to the homedetails page. Returns the full per-property record per row (with extracted_features populated). Per-target errors are captured per-row — one bad target will not fail the whole call. Calls are concurrent, and the whole call is bounded by an overall deadline: any row still unsettled when it is reached comes back as { status: "pending", retryable: true, error } with a top-level pending count — re-run just those targets. The raw description is omitted from each row by default — pass include_description: true to keep it. The redundant summary table is also opt-in via include_summary: true — by default only results[] is returned, which already carries every fact.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetsYesArray of 2–25 properties to compare. (Cap raised from 8 to 25 in #53; for unbounded structured fetch without the summary table, use `compass_bulk_get`.)
include_summaryNoInclude the pivoted `summary` table (one row per compared field, one column per listing). Defaults to `false` — `results[].property.*` already carries every fact and the summary was roughly 30% of response weight. Useful only for human-readable rendering.
include_descriptionNoInclude the raw `description` (Compass marketing copy) on each row. Defaults to `false` — `extracted_features` is always populated.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. First observedv0.12.1

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes far beyond the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations by disclosing concurrency, an overall deadline, per-target error isolation, the pending row shape with retryable flag, and the sha-only redirect behavior. It does not contradict any annotation.

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 dense but every sentence carries new information: response shape, error semantics, defaults, opt-in flags, and retry behavior. The purpose is front-loaded and there is no filler or repetition of annotation fields.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry return-value semantics. It does: full per-property records, extracted_features, per-row error capture, pending row shape, top-level pending count, and default omissions. Combined with deadline and retry guidance, the agent has everything needed to invoke and interpret the call.

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?

The schema already covers all three parameters at 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful extra nuance: sha-only targets fetch /listing/<sha>/view and redirect, and the boolean parameters affect response contents and weight. That is value beyond the schema, though not every parameter needed additional clarification.

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 opening sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch 2 or more Compass properties and align their facts side-by-side.' The '2 or more' minimum distinguishes it from single-property tools like compass_get_property, and the schema note about compass_bulk_get further disambiguates it from the unbounded sibling.

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?

The description gives clear when-to-use guidance: side-by-side comparison of 2–25 properties. It also explains how to handle partial failures ('re-run just those targets'), and the targets schema explicitly routes unbounded structured fetch to compass_bulk_get, providing an explicit alternative.

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