AskRentAI

Analyze Availability

analyze_availability

Read-onlyIdempotent

Available (vacant) inventory + exposure by property and unit type.

Runs RM's ReportWriter 'Available Inventory Summary' (looked up by name): per-property vacancy rate, count of available units by unit type (MH Lot, RV, Apt, DOH, ...), and average days vacant per type. Use for "what's our available inventory / exposure", "vacancy rate by property", "which parks have the most vacant lots". Scope to a portfolio/property set for a fast answer (unscoped is ~2 min). For a unit-level vacant list use analyze_vacancy.

``location`` (optional): a Rent Manager Location ID, a comma-separated
list, or ``"all"`` to run across every Location on this connection (see
``list_locations``). Blank = all Locations if the connection has several,
else its only Location. Output is labelled per Location; a Location that
can't be reached is listed as skipped. IDs (property, tenant, ...) belong
to one Location, so pass that Location when you filter by one.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "analyze_availability"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`top_n`	No
`location`	No
`portfolio`	No
`property_ids`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 22, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / location

Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "title": "Location",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedOct 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld), so the description's added value is runtime cost (~2 min unscoped) and partial-failure behavior ('a Location that can't be reached is listed as skipped'), plus per-Location output labelling. It does not describe pagination or how top_n affects output, keeping it just short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose before operational details, and the example questions justify their space by mapping to real user intents. Slightly long, with the location paragraph reading more like reference documentation than call guidance, but no sentence is pure filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be re-explained, and the description covers scope, cost, sibling routing, and failure handling. The one real gap is `top_n`, which no structured field or prose explains, leaving the agent guessing how result volume is capped.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it only does so for `location` — exhaustively (ID, comma list, 'all', blank default, cross-Location ID caveat). `top_n` is never mentioned, and `portfolio`/`property_ids` are only implied by 'Scope to a portfolio/property set', leaving half the parameters undocumented.

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?

Opens with a precise verb+resource and scope ('Available (vacant) inventory + exposure by property and unit type') and names the underlying report ('Available Inventory Summary'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from analyze_vacancy, so an agent can pick between the two without opening either schema.

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?

Gives concrete trigger phrases ('what's our available inventory / exposure', 'vacancy rate by property', 'which parks have the most vacant lots') and an explicit routing rule: unit-level vacant list goes to analyze_vacancy. It also advises scoping for speed ('unscoped is ~2 min'), which is a real usage decision.

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

All AskRentAI 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?