Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

zillow-mcp

by chrischall

Estimate rent-vs-buy break-even over a horizon

zillow_estimate_rent_vs_buy
Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculate cumulative buy vs rent costs over any horizon, including mortgage, taxes, maintenance, appreciation, rent growth, opportunity cost. Returns yearly costs, break-even year, net difference.

Instructions

Project the cumulative cost of buying a home versus renting a comparable place over N years. Accounts for down payment, closing costs, monthly PITI, maintenance (~1%/yr default), property appreciation (~3%/yr default), rent growth (~3%/yr default), and the opportunity cost of the down payment (renter invests it at the investment_return_rate, default 6%/yr). Mortgage P&I stops once the loan is paid off, so horizons longer than the loan term are handled. horizon_years and loan_term_years are capped at 50. Returns the year-by-year cumulative costs, the break-even year, and the net difference at the horizon. No network — pure local math.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
home_priceYes
hoa_monthlyNo
down_paymentYes
monthly_rentYes
horizon_yearsNoDefault 7, max 50
interest_rateYes
loan_term_yearsNoDefault 30, max 50
insurance_annualNo
maintenance_rateNoAnnual % of home value, default 1.0
rent_growth_rateNoAnnual %, default 3.0
appreciation_rateNoAnnual %, default 3.0
closing_cost_rateNo% of home price, default 2.5
property_tax_rateNo
selling_cost_rateNo% of sale price, default 6.0
investment_return_rateNoAnnual return on the renter's parallel-invested down payment, default 6.0

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.1.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / horizon_years / description
      Previous value: -"Default 7"New value: +"Default 7, max 50"
    • changedInput schema / properties / horizon_years / maximum
      Previous value: -9007199254740991New value: +50
    • addedInput schema / properties / loan_term_years / description
      Added value: +"Default 30, max 50"
    • changedInput schema / properties / loan_term_years / maximum
      Previous value: -9007199254740991New value: +50
  2. 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"
  3. First observedv0.11.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable behavior beyond that: 'No network — pure local math', handling of mortgages paid off within the horizon, and the capping of horizon_years and loan_term_years at 50. It does not contradict annotations and enriches the agent's understanding of execution behavior.

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?

The description is a single dense paragraph with five sentences, each adding substantive detail. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and follows with assumptions and outputs. While it could be bulleted for readability, it is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity with no wasted words.

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?

Given 15 parameters and no output schema, the description is remarkably complete: it explains inputs, defaults, edge cases (mortgage payoff, horizon caps), and outputs (year-by-year costs, break-even year, net difference). An agent has sufficient information to invoke the tool correctly without needing further clarification.

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 53%, leaving many parameters undocumented. The description compensates by explaining the role of key parameters: down payment, closing costs, monthly PITI, maintenance (default 1%), appreciation (default 3%), rent growth (default 3%), investment_return_rate (default 6%), and the cap on horizon_years and loan_term_years. This adds meaning beyond the schema, though not every parameter is covered.

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 clearly states a specific verb ('Project') and resource ('cumulative cost of buying a home versus renting'), and outlines the key factors and outputs (year-by-year costs, break-even year, net difference). It is distinct from sibling tools, none of which offer rent-vs-buy analysis, so an agent can immediately identify its purpose.

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 implies usage for rent-vs-buy decisions through its detailed cost modeling, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. Since no sibling tool provides this functionality, the context is clear without needing exclusions, but explicit guidance would improve it.

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