Skip to main content
Glama

DFX Real Estate Intelligence

by io.github.Capital-W-Holdings

Open a Stripe payment for one quote and get the payment URL

fund_dfx_account

Opens a Stripe payment for exactly one quote, into the account key you present, and returns the hosted payment URL and a payment id. THE AMOUNT IS READ FROM THE QUOTE, SERVER SIDE. There is no field on this tool through which a price can be proposed, raised or lowered. A CARD MUST STILL BE AUTHORIZED. That is the card network's boundary and not a DFX design choice: show the URL and the price to your human, or present your own payment credential to Stripe. Everything either side of that step is callable by a machine. Returning to the success page is NOT a receipt. Poll dfx_payment_status until it reports PAID; that reads the DFX ledger, which advances only on a Stripe event DFX verified and re-read from Stripe. This build collects Stripe TEST payments only. No real money moves.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
quote_idYesfrom the PAYMENT_REQUIRED reply
account_keyNoyour DFX account key, if your MCP client cannot send the X-DFX-Account header

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the minimal annotations, it discloses several non-obvious behaviors: the amount is read server-side from the quote, no price parameter exists, card authorization is still required, the success page is not a receipt, and only Stripe TEST payments are collected. This materially reduces the chance of an agent misusing the tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, then adds critical caveats in a logical order: amount authority, card authorization, receipt semantics, and test mode. Every sentence earns its place; the length is justified by the risk of a payment tool.

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 output schema, the description appropriately states the return values: hosted payment URL and payment id. It also covers test-mode behavior and the polling follow-up, so an agent has enough to invoke and continue the flow. It does not describe failure modes, but those are less critical for a 2-parameter tool with this much context.

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. The description adds meaning by explaining that quote_id determines the amount server-side and that there is no price-adjustment field, which prevents the agent from looking for an amount parameter. The account_key fallback context is already present in the schema, so the description does not need to repeat it.

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 opening sentence names the exact action, resource, and result: open a Stripe payment for exactly one quote and return a hosted payment URL plus a payment id. It distinguishes itself from the sibling dfx_payment_status, which is for polling status, and open_dfx_account, which is for account creation.

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?

The description clearly says to use this tool for one quote and explicitly directs the agent to poll dfx_payment_status until PAID, covering the main alternative. It does not enumerate when-not-to-use conditions for other siblings, but the scope is precise enough for correct routing.

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

All DFX Real Estate Intelligence toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a clearly distinct task: exact address resolution versus filter-based parcel search, subscription delta versus event search, coverage status versus natural-language routing, and the account lifecycle is split into open/fund/status. Even the closest pairs, changes_since and search_property_events, are explicitly disambiguated in their descriptions.

Naming Consistency3/5

The dominant pattern is verb_noun, e.g. resolve_address, search_parcels, get_property_record, but several tools break it: dfx_coverage, dfx_payment_status, debt_maturity_schedule, changes_since, and what_can_dfx_answer. These names are still readable and semantically clear, so the naming is mixed rather than chaotic.

Tool Count5/5

Twelve tools is well within the ideal range and each tool earns its place: discovery, coverage, resolution, search, records, event subscription, paid maturity schedules, and the account/payment lifecycle all have a distinct role. No tool feels redundant or ornamental.

Completeness4/5

The read-only real estate intelligence surface is well covered: coverage checks, address and organization resolution, property records, parcel search, event search, delta subscription, paid loan schedules, and account funding. The main gap is that resolve_organization returns entity IDs without an obvious downstream tool for organization detail, and there is no separate event detail endpoint, but agents can work around these.

Resources