PropertyList: Spanish Property MLS

Log note

log_note

Log a note against a contact or a listing in YOUR agency's CRM (e.g. record a call outcome or a viewing). Provide the note text plus a contact_id (from find_contacts) and/or a property reference. The note appears on the contact/property timeline. Requires a linked PropertyList account (or an agency API key).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	Yes	The note text to record.
`contact_id`	No	Contact to attach the note to (from find_contacts). Optional if a property reference is given.
`property_reference`	No	Listing reference to attach the note to. Optional if a contact_id is given.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	Yes
`activity_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 6, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "activity_id": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "enum": [
+        "logged"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status",
+    "activity_id"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedJul 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent write. The description adds real value beyond them: the note surfaces on the contact/property timeline, and an auth prerequisite (linked PropertyList account or agency API key) is disclosed. It stops short of noting duplicate-note risk or what the write returns, but the added context is substantive.

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 action and scope, then parameters, then the auth prerequisite. Three short sentences with little waste, though the parenthetical example and the account requirement could be tightened slightly.

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 values need no explanation. For a simple three-parameter write tool, the description covers purpose, target entities, the parameter relationship, and the account prerequisite — nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not enforce: it frames contact_id and property_reference as an 'and/or' pair where at least one is expected, even though the schema marks only 'note' as required. It also reiterates that contact_id comes from find_contacts, aiding correct invocation.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Log a note against a contact or a listing in YOUR agency's CRM') plus concrete examples of use ('record a call outcome or a viewing'). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling find_contacts by naming it as the source of the contact_id, so an agent can route between them without opening a schema.

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?

Gives clear context for when the tool applies (recording call outcomes or viewings) and states the prerequisite of a linked PropertyList account or agency API key. It does not name an alternative tool or state when not to use this one, so it falls short of a 5.

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?