Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

listing

by com.beycome
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get MLS questionnaire link

beycome_questionnaire_link

Questionnaire stage — mint a pre-authorized link to the MLS questionnaire form (POST /api/mls/questionnaire-link).

Requires a PAID listing (premium active, Flat/Yes) — whether the user just paid on the submit-property page (beycome_submit_property_link) or already had a paid listing with the questionnaire still pending. Returns a pre-authorized link (expires in 7 days) — this tool only hands back the URL; everything else happens in the browser, with no login step. Present the URL and tell the user that on the page they will:

  1. review the pre-filled MLS questionnaire and complete any fields Beycome couldn't pre-fill,

  2. upload property photos and the required documents,

  3. review and submit. After they submit, the listing goes live within about 48 hours, provided all the paperwork clears.

Failure modes to relay plainly: 403 — the token is not the owner's; 422 — the listing is not paid yet, or the questionnaire was already submitted; 401 — bad/missing token.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
prop_idYesProperty id in beycome.
access_tokenYesBearer access token from beycome_signin_verify, or a previously saved token from your memory for this user.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / access_token / description
      Previous value: -"Bearer access token from beycome_signin_verify."New value: +"Bearer access token from beycome_signin_verify, or a previously saved token from your memory for this user."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / access_token / description
      Previous value: -"Bearer access token from beycome_signin."New value: +"Bearer access token from beycome_signin_verify."
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnly=false, openWorld=true, destructive=false. The description adds substantial extra context beyond that: the 7-day link expiry, that the tool only returns a URL with no login step, the browser-side workflow, the ~48h listing timeline, and explicit 401/403/422 failure semantics.

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?

Content is front-loaded (purpose and prerequisite first) and the numbered steps and failure-mode list make it scannable. It is somewhat long, but nearly every sentence adds operational value.

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 an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the description fully covers prerequisites, next steps, timing, and error handling. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 schema already documents prop_id and access_token, and the description adds no parameter-level detail. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('mint a pre-authorized link to the MLS questionnaire form') and even names the endpoint. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like beycome_submit_property_link, which it explicitly references.

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?

It states the prerequisite ('Requires a PAID listing (premium active, Flat/Yes)'), covers both triggering scenarios (just paid vs. already-paid with questionnaire pending), and routes to the related sibling beycome_submit_property_link. An agent knows exactly when this applies.

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

All listing toolsInspect
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