Skip to main content
Glama

DFX Real Estate Intelligence

by io.github.Capital-W-Holdings
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

People across the family office, sponsor, venture and private equity graphs

search_people
Read-onlyIdempotent

Investment professionals, principals and family office staff as names with titles, roles, seniority, investment responsibility, organisation and tenure, from public filings and firm pages; with domain=ria, IAPD-registered advisors by name or firm. By name, or by organization_dfx_id, or by role. cross_graph_only=true answers 'which venture people are connected to family offices' in one call. At least one of query, organization_dfx_id, role, investment_responsibility or cross_graph_only is required; a call with none of them is refused with INVALID_ARGUMENT. Contact points are withheld over MCP; the site publishes them per office.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
roleNofamily_office: leadership, cio, direct_investments, operations, board, venture, real_estate, family_principal, other. venture_capital: managing_partner, general_partner, partner, principal, vice_president, venture_partner, operating_partner, platform, founder_executive, board, other. private_equity: managing_partner, partner, operating_partner, vice_president, business_development and the other categories on each card.
limitNo
queryNoA person's name (contains).
domainNo
current_onlyNo
cross_graph_onlyNoOnly people who are the same person on two graphs (a venture professional who is also on a family office's ADV Schedule A), linked by shared individual CRD; returns both cards.
organization_dfx_idNoA DFX id: dfx:fo:<uuid> (family office graph), dfx:isi:<uuid> (sponsor graph), dfx:vc:<uuid> (venture graph), dfx:pe:<uuid> (private equity graph), dfx:ria:<uuid> (registered investment adviser graph), dfx:al:<uuid> (allocator graph), dfx:pc:<uuid> (private credit graph), dfx:ref:<uuid> (real estate fund graph), or a bare real estate UUID.
investment_responsibilityNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "family_office",
-  "independent_sponsor",
-  "venture_capital",
-  "private_equity"
-]New value: +[
+  "family_office",
+  "independent_sponsor",
+  "venture_capital",
+  "private_equity",
+  "ria",
+  "allocators",
+  "real_estate_funds"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / organization_dfx_id / description
      Previous value: -"A DFX id: dfx:fo:<uuid> (family office graph), dfx:isi:<uuid> (sponsor graph), dfx:vc:<uuid> (venture graph), dfx:pe:<uuid> (private equity graph), or a bare real estate UUID."New value: +"A DFX id: dfx:fo:<uuid> (family office graph), dfx:isi:<uuid> (sponsor graph), dfx:vc:<uuid> (venture graph), dfx:pe:<uuid> (private equity graph), dfx:ria:<uuid> (registered investment adviser graph), dfx:al:<uuid> (allocator graph), dfx:pc:<uuid> (private credit graph), dfx:ref:<uuid> (real estate fund graph), or a bare real estate UUID."
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "family_office",
-  "independent_sponsor",
-  "venture_capital"
-]New value: +[
+  "family_office",
+  "independent_sponsor",
+  "venture_capital",
+  "private_equity"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / organization_dfx_id / description
      Previous value: -"A DFX id: dfx:fo:<uuid> (family office graph), dfx:isi:<uuid> (sponsor graph), dfx:vc:<uuid> (venture graph), or a bare real estate UUID."New value: +"A DFX id: dfx:fo:<uuid> (family office graph), dfx:isi:<uuid> (sponsor graph), dfx:vc:<uuid> (venture graph), dfx:pe:<uuid> (private equity graph), or a bare real estate UUID."
    • changedInput schema / properties / role / description
      Previous value: -"family_office: leadership, cio, direct_investments, operations, board, venture, real_estate, family_principal, other. venture_capital: managing_partner, general_partner, partner, principal, vice_president, venture_partner, operating_partner, platform, founder_executive, board, other."New value: +"family_office: leadership, cio, direct_investments, operations, board, venture, real_estate, family_principal, other. venture_capital: managing_partner, general_partner, partner, principal, vice_president, venture_partner, operating_partner, platform, founder_executive, board, other. private_equity: managing_partner, partner, operating_partner, vice_president, business_development and the other categories on each card."
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / query / description
      Added value: +"A person's name (contains)."
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / cross_graph_only
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only people who are the same person on two graphs (a venture professional who is also on a family office's ADV Schedule A), linked by shared individual CRD; returns both cards.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  5. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the bar for behavioral disclosure is lower. The description adds meaningful context: it notes that 'Contact points are withheld over MCP; the site publishes them per office' and that calls with missing required parameters are refused with INVALID_ARGUMENT. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

The description is structured with the core subject first, followed by filtering optionsabbruch, a special-use example, and error behavior. Each sentence contributes meaningful information, and there is no fluff. It is slightly longer than necessary but remains focused and ordered logically from general to specific.

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?

For a search tool with 8 parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers the core usage patterns, required parameter constraints, error behavior, and a special cross-graph capability. It explains what data is returned and from which sources, and even discloses contact-point withholding. Missing details like limit defaults and current_only semantics are available in the schema, so the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to formulate valid calls.

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 50%, with limit, current_only, and investment_responsibility lacking in-schema descriptions. The tool description partially compensates by explaining the 'at least one required' rule and the cross_graph_only semantics, but it does not clarify the meaning or acceptable values for current_only or investment_responsibility. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description does not fully bridge the coverage gap.

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 description states that it searches for people (investment professionals, principals, family office staff) with rich attributes: 'names with titles, roles, seniority, investment responsibility, organisation and tenure' and that it covers family office, sponsor, venture, private equity, and RIA domains. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling entity-search tools like search_family_offices and search_ria_firms by focusing on people rather than organizations, and by explicitly mentioning filtering by name, organization_dfx_id, or role.

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 gives clear usage context: search by name, organization_dfx_id, or role, and describes the cross_graph_only scenario ('answers which venture people are connected to family offices in one call'). It also explicitly states that at least one of query, organization_dfx_id, role, investment_responsibility, or cross_graph_only is required and that calls with none are rejected with INVALID_ARGUMENT. However, it does not explicitly mention when NOT to use this tool compared to alternative search tools, which keeps it from a 5.

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
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