SiteCheck Jobs & Property

RE/MAX US homes for sale in a ZIP code from remax.com

realestate_remax

Read-only

RE/MAX US homes for sale in a ZIP code (or a city by its Census place ID) from remax.com search pages: listing ID, MLS number and MLS name, address, price, beds, baths, living area (sq ft), lot (acres), property type, banners (new listing, open house...), open-house times, listing office and courtesy line, photo and URL; 24 per page plus the total count. MLS IDX data, for consumer use. Related tools on this server, for a different need: realestate_estately when you need US homes for sale from Estately for a city: per listing; realestate_hemnet when you need Hemnet homes for sale in an area: address, housing form. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "state": "<state>"
    },
    "name": "realestate_remax"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`zip`	No	5-digit ZIP code, e.g. 78704 (give zip, or city + placeId)
`city`	No	City name, e.g. Austin (with placeId)
`page`	No	Page number from 1 (default 1)
`state`	Yes	2-letter US state code (required), e.g. TX
`placeId`	No	7-digit Census place GEOID of the city, e.g. 4805000 for Austin TX

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`zip`	No
`page`	No
`count`	No
`state`	No
`total`	No
`source`	No
`placeId`	No
`listings`	No
`checkedAt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses pagination behavior (24 per page plus total count), the data provenance and licensing profile (MLS IDX data, consumer use), and the billing model ($0.002 USDC per successful call via x402, failed calls not charged). The payment/auth requirement is exactly the kind of behavioral detail annotations cannot express.

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 definition is front-loaded with the resource, source and returned fields, then alternatives, then price — a logical order. It is a dense run-on sentence with semicolon-delimited field lists, which is heavy but each element (fields, alternatives, cost) carries information an agent needs.

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?

With an output schema covering return shape and 100% parameter coverage, the description only needs to supply sourcing, scoping, pagination and cost, and it does all four. Geographic scope (US) and the consumer-use restriction are stated, so nothing essential is missing for a correct call.

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 coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented, and the description largely restates the zip-or-city+placeId pattern and the per-page size tied to 'page'. It adds little semantic detail the schema does not already carry, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb+resource (RE/MAX US homes for sale), the exact source (remax.com search pages), the accepted locators (ZIP code or city via Census place ID), and enumerates the returned fields. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from realestate_estately and realestate_hemnet, so an agent can identify it without opening the 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?

It gives explicit routing ('realestate_estately when you need US homes for sale from Estately for a city', 'realestate_hemnet when you need Hemnet homes for sale in an area') and clarifies the zip-vs-city+placeId input choice. However, among a sibling set containing zillow, redfin, realtor and dozens of other US listing sources, only two alternatives are addressed, leaving the most likely confusions unresolved.

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

All SiteCheck Jobs & Property 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?