PropertyList: Spanish Property MLS

Create contact

create_contact

Add a new contact to YOUR agency's CRM. Use when the agent wants to save a person (buyer, owner, enquirer). If a contact with the same email already exists it is returned rather than duplicated. The contact is created unassigned and flagged as needing attention so it surfaces in the CRM. Requires a linked PropertyList account (or an agency API key).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Contact's first name (or full name).
`email`	No	Email address. Optional but recommended (used for de-duplication).
`phone`	No	Phone number. Optional.
`surname`	No	Contact's surname. Optional.
`company_name`	No	Company name (for a business contact). Optional.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	Yes	exists: a contact with this email was already in the CRM, and nothing was added.
`contact_id`	Yes	For log_note.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 6, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "contact_id": {
+      "description": "For log_note.",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "exists: a contact with this email was already in the CRM, and nothing was added.",
+      "enum": [
+        "created",
+        "exists"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status",
+    "contact_id"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedJul 27, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With annotations already declaring readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, the description still adds real value: email-based de-duplication (existing contact returned instead of a duplicate created), the created contact's default state (unassigned, flagged as needing attention), and an auth prerequisite. Note the de-dup wording reads as effectively idempotent-by-email while idempotentHint=false; this is a nuance rather than a direct contradiction, but it is the one point where the two sources need reconciling.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, then usage trigger, dedup behavior, and prerequisite. No padding or repetition of the schema, though the final prerequisite sentence could be folded more tightly.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape need not be explained. For a create tool with clean annotations, the description covers action, trigger, side effects, de-duplication, default state and auth prerequisite — everything an agent needs to invoke it correctly.

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% across all 5 parameters, so the schema already documents name, email, phone, surname and company_name. The description adds only that email drives de-duplication, which is already stated in the email field's schema description, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource and scope: 'Add a new contact to YOUR agency's CRM', with a clarifying list of the entities involved (buyer, owner, enquirer). It is readily distinguishable from the read-side sibling find_contacts, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

'Use when the agent wants to save a person (buyer, owner, enquirer)' gives a clear trigger condition, and the prerequisite of a linked PropertyList account or agency API key is stated. It does not name alternatives (e.g. submit_enquiry, log_note) or exclusion cases, so it falls short of a full when/when-not routing rule.

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

All PropertyList: Spanish Property MLS 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?