real-estate
Server Details
Book a free consultation or home valuation with SimpliCity Real Estate in Lincoln, Nebraska.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Score is being calculated. Check back soon.
Available Tools
3 toolsget_business_infoAbout SimpliCity Real EstateAInspect
Structured facts about SimpliCity Real Estate (Lincoln, Nebraska): the team (Wade Bartels, Sydney Hrouda, Amanda Davis), what each agent specializes in, service areas, licenses, contact channels, and how consultations work. Call this first to pick the right agent.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, but the description fully discloses the tool's read-only informational nature and what content it returns (team, specializations, etc.). It does not mention any side effects, auth needs, or limitations, but for a static info tool, this is sufficient.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences: first lists content, second provides usage guidance. No fluff, front-loaded, every sentence earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no parameters, no output schema, and low complexity, the description covers the tool's purpose and content adequately. Could be slightly more specific about the structure of 'structured facts,' but overall complete for its role.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With zero parameters, the description adds substantial meaning by detailing the exact information returned (team members, specializations, service areas, etc.) beyond the empty schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool provides structured facts about SimpliCity Real Estate, listing specific content (team, specializations, service areas, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings by positioning it as a first step to pick the right agent, differentiating from action-oriented tools like request_consultation.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly says 'Call this first to pick the right agent,' indicating it should be used before sibling tools. Provides clear context for when to use, though it does not explicitly exclude alternative scenarios or detail when not to use.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
request_consultationBook a real estate consultationAInspect
Request a free, no-obligation consultation with a SimpliCity Real Estate agent for buying or selling residential property in Lincoln / southeast Nebraska. A human team member confirms every request (same or next business day). Only call after your user explicitly approves; pass user_approved=true and their real contact info.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| agent | No | Which team member to request (see get_business_info for who fits; default wade) | |
| No | Client's email (email or phone required) | ||
| phone | No | Client's US phone number (email or phone required) | |
| message | No | What the client needs, in their words | |
| timeline | No | Buying/selling timeline, e.g. '3-6 months' | |
| last_name | No | Client's last name | |
| first_name | Yes | Client's first name (required) | |
| sms_consent | No | True ONLY if the client explicitly agreed to receive text messages | |
| user_approved | Yes | REQUIRED true: your user explicitly asked you to book this | |
| assistant_name | No | Name of the AI assistant making this request, e.g. 'ChatGPT' | |
| preferred_times | No | Preferred days/times for the conversation, e.g. 'weekday evenings' |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses that it's free and no-obligation, and that a human confirms within same/next business day. Does not detail follow-up process or potential outcomes, but covers the core behavioral trait.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and key constraints. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given 11 parameters and no output schema, description covers essential purpose and approval requirement. Could mention how the agent will follow up, but overall sufficient for an agent to decide and invoke correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% (baseline 3). Description adds behavioral context beyond schema, e.g., emphasizing 'user_approved=true' and 'their real contact info'. Provides useful usage hints.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states verb 'request', resource 'free consultation', and geographic/scope specificity 'buying or selling residential property in Lincoln / southeast Nebraska'. Distinguishes from siblings (get_business_info, request_home_valuation) by being the booking tool.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly states the critical condition: 'Only call after your user explicitly approves; pass user_approved=true'. Does not directly compare with siblings or mention when not to use, but the constraint is strong guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
request_home_valuationRequest a home valuationAInspect
Request a professional (human-prepared) market valuation of a property in Lincoln or southeast Nebraska. Requires the property address plus the client's name and contact. Only call after your user explicitly approves (user_approved=true).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| agent | No | Which team member to request (see get_business_info for who fits; default wade) | |
| No | Client's email (email or phone required) | ||
| phone | No | Client's US phone number (email or phone required) | |
| message | No | What the client needs, in their words | |
| timeline | No | Buying/selling timeline, e.g. '3-6 months' | |
| last_name | No | Client's last name | |
| first_name | Yes | Client's first name (required) | |
| sms_consent | No | True ONLY if the client explicitly agreed to receive text messages | |
| user_approved | Yes | REQUIRED true: your user explicitly asked you to book this | |
| assistant_name | No | Name of the AI assistant making this request, e.g. 'ChatGPT' | |
| preferred_times | No | Preferred days/times for the conversation, e.g. 'weekday evenings' | |
| property_address | Yes | Full address of the property to value (required) |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses human preparation and the user approval prerequisite, but does not detail what happens after submission (e.g., confirmation, delivery method), leaving behavioral uncertainty.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then requirements, then critical condition. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple request tool without output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers purpose, requirements, and approval. Missing post-submission expectations (e.g., confirmation) but sufficient for the agent to invoke correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value by summarizing key requirements (address, name, contact) and emphasizing the user_approved condition, plus the geographic constraint not in schema. It adds meaning without redundancy.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool requests a professional human-prepared market valuation, specifies the geographic scope (Lincoln/southeast Nebraska), and distinguishes from siblings (request_consultation, get_business_info) by focusing on property valuation.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly requires user approval (user_approved=true) and lists essential inputs (address, name, contact). It implies the tool is for valuation-only requests, but does not explicitly exclude other contexts or compare to sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!