Tendeck: AI-run real estate CRM + broker recruiting

support_report

Report a problem with Tendeck to the Tendeck engineers. Use it when a Tendeck tool fails, returns something that looks wrong, or the user is stuck (sign-in, payment, a missing delivery). Include what you were trying to do, the tool name and the exact error text. Do not include passwords or payment details. Returns a ticket and a status_token: keep both and call support_status later for the reply. Tell the user the team has it.

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": {
      "summary": "<summary>"
    },
    "name": "support_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tool`	No	Name of the Tendeck tool that failed, if a tool failed.
`error`	No	The exact error text the tool returned.
`steps`	No	What you and the user did just before it broke.
`detail`	No	What happened, in order. No passwords or payment details.
`contact`	No	optional: how a person can reach the user, only if the user agrees
`product`	No	Which Tendeck product: p1 brokerage recruiting, p2 agent CRM, or other.
`summary`	Yes	One line: what went wrong, in plain words.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the return values (ticket and status_token), instructs the agent to keep both and poll support_status later, and sets a privacy boundary (no passwords or payment details). It does not say whether the report notifies anyone immediately or how long a reply takes, which is the remaining gap.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then triggers, then what to include, then what happens to the result. Five short sentences and each carries distinct information; nothing repeats the schema.

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?

Seven parameters, no annotations, and no output schema — yet the description covers the return value, the mandatory follow-up call, privacy constraints, and the user-facing message. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds real composition guidance beyond the schema: include what you were trying to do, the tool name, and the exact error text — mapping onto steps, tool, and error. The privacy note also constrains what may go into detail.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Report a problem with Tendeck to the Tendeck engineers') and names the sibling that continues the workflow (support_status). An agent can distinguish it from tendeck_help or describe_product without opening the schema.

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?

Gives concrete triggers: a tool failing, wrong-looking output, or a stuck user (sign-in, payment, missing delivery). It also routes the follow-up to support_status. It stops short of an explicit when-not clause (e.g., general how-to questions belong to tendeck_help), so it is strong but not complete.

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

All Tendeck: AI-run real estate CRM + broker recruiting 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?