ResMan MCP Server and API by Cotlet

List prospects in ResMan

resman_list_prospects

Read-onlyIdempotent

List prospects in the user's own ResMan account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in ResMan step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's ResMan Cloud Browser. ResMan's official API: ResMan has an API, but only for approved Integration Partners (checked 23 Oct 2026).

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": "resman_list_prospects"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, but the description adds the critical behavioral fact that the tool 'opens nothing by itself' and instead returns screens/buttons/fields instructions. It also discloses the API-partner restriction, explaining why a browser-driven path exists. What is missing is any indication of the guide's size or whether it varies by account configuration.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and the returned artifact, then the workflow, then the API caveat. The phrase 'from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent' and the dated API verification note are slightly tangential, but they are short and the structure stays easy to scan.

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?

With no inputs, no output schema and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies what an agent needs: what comes back (step-by-step instructions), that no action occurs, and which tools perform the actual work. The only gap is the exact shape of the returned guide, which the agent must discover at call time.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. It correctly implies the tool is scoped implicitly to the authenticated user's own ResMan account, which is meaningful given the empty schema. No further parameter detail is possible or needed.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific verb and resource (list prospects in the user's ResMan account) and then clarifies that the tool returns a step-by-step how-to rather than the prospect data itself. That second clause is essential, since the name alone would mislead an agent into expecting records. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like resman_list_leases, which keeps it out of 5 territory.

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?

It gives a clear two-step workflow: call this tool to get the in-app procedure, then execute the steps with cotlet_browser_* tools in the ResMan Cloud Browser. The condition that selects this tool (user wants prospects in ResMan) is implied by the resource name. It does not state when not to use it, e.g. against the official API route it mentions.

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

All ResMan MCP Server and API by Cotlet 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?