Real Estate Analyzer
Server Details
Free real-estate underwriting, no key or account. 6 strategies, stress tests, max offer.
- Status
- Healthy
- Uptime
- 99.8% over 70 days
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP · MCP 2025-06-18
- URL
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
Each tool has a distinct core purpose: single-strategy analysis, cross-strategy screening, reverse price solving, and strategy reference. analyze_deal and best_use both produce deal scores and could be briefly confused, but the descriptions make the boundary clear.
Names are consistently snake_case and mostly follow a verb_noun pattern (analyze_deal, list_strategies, solve_max_offer). best_use is a noun phrase and is the one minor deviation.
Four tools are well-scoped for a focused real-estate analysis server, and each covers a distinct workflow without redundancy. Nothing feels padded or missing at the tool-count level.
The surface covers analysis, cross-strategy screening, max-offer solving, and input reference, which are the core workflows. Minor gaps exist around comparing multiple properties or retrieving/reusing saved reports beyond the returned report_url.
Available Tools
4 toolsanalyze_dealAnalyze a real-estate dealAInspect
Analyze a real-estate investment deal and get a 0-100 score, verdict, cash flow, cap rate, DSCR, stress tests, break-even thresholds, and a shareable report link. Strategies: ltr (long-term rental), str (short-term rental), brrr, multifamily, flip (fix-n-flip), newc (new construction). All rates/percents are FRACTIONS (0.0675 = 6.75%). Omitted operating inputs are filled with documented defaults and listed in assumptions.estimated_fields. Output is a software estimate, not financial, investment, tax or legal advice — figures are projections to verify, not recommendations. Free, no key; the response includes a shareable report_url.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| inputs | Yes | Deal inputs in camelCase engine keys. Anything omitted gets a documented default, listed back under assumptions.estimated_fields. Minimum: price + the strategy's income driver (marketRent / adr+occupancy / units / arv / land+build). Call list_strategies for the full per-strategy schema. | |
| strategy | Yes | Investment strategy to analyze. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| score | Yes | 0-100 deal score. |
| levers | No | Top input changes that would each add ~$1,000/yr cash flow (STR). |
| stress | No | Stress scenarios, each with a verdict. |
| metrics | Yes | Headline metrics for this strategy. |
| summary | Yes | Deterministic one-paragraph summary. |
| upfront | No | Cash-into-the-deal / project-cost stack rows {label, amount, kind}. |
| verdict | Yes | Strong (85+) / Solid (70+) / Workable (50+) / Risky (25+) / Run Away. |
| strategy | Yes | |
| breakdown | No | Ordered cash-flow / profit waterfall rows {label, amount, kind}; outflows are negative. |
| data_note | No | REIzer data tools that can refine this analysis (needs an API key). |
| disclaimer | No | Not financial advice — software estimate only. |
| report_url | No | Shareable public report page (30 days). |
| thresholds | No | |
| assumptions | No | estimated_fields lists every input REIzer defaulted. |
| inputs_used | No | The resolved input set the analysis ran on — caller values plus documented defaults. |
| sensitivity | No | Which input drivers move the result most — {driver, range, low_impact, high_impact, swing}, sorted by swing (STR). |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is already known. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: omitted inputs are silently defaulted and surfaced in assumptions.estimated_fields, output is an estimate not advice, and a shareable report_url is included. It doesn't say whether anything is persisted server-side, which keeps it from a 5.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Front-loaded with purpose and outputs, then strategy list, then unit convention, then default semantics, then disclaimer. Each sentence carries information, though the advice disclaimer is somewhat verbose and could be compressed without losing meaning.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the description still previews the payload and explains defaults, fraction units, auth-free access, and the disclaimer. For a nested, multi-strategy tool this is close to complete; the only gap is per-strategy required-field guidance, which is delegated to the schema and to list_strategies.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100% and the nested inputs object already documents every field, including the FRACTION convention, per-strategy requirements, and default behavior. The description reinforces the fraction rule and the default-filling semantics but adds little the schema doesn't already state, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description opens with a specific verb+resource ('Analyze a real-estate investment deal') and enumerates concrete outputs: score, verdict, cash flow, cap rate, DSCR, stress tests, break-even, report link. That is unambiguous. It does not differentiate itself from siblings (best_use, solve_max_offer, list_strategies), so it stops short of a 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It tells the agent the context of use (analyzing an investment deal under one of six named strategies) and that no key is needed, which removes an auth prerequisite. However, it never says when NOT to use it or when a sibling like solve_max_offer is the better route, so there are no exclusions or explicit alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
best_useRank the best use of a propertyARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Screen ONE property across every strategy the provided inputs qualify for and rank them by deal score — answers "what is the best use of this property?". Provide a superset of inputs (price, marketRent, adr, occupancy, rehabBudget, arv, units, …); strategies missing inputs are skipped with reasons. All rates/percents are FRACTIONS (0.0675 = 6.75%). Omitted operating inputs are filled with documented defaults and listed in assumptions.estimated_fields. Free, no key.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| inputs | Yes | Deal inputs in camelCase engine keys. Anything omitted gets a documented default, listed back under assumptions.estimated_fields. Send a SUPERSET across strategies — whatever you know. Strategies missing their required fields are skipped with a reason rather than failing the call. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| note | No | |
| ranked | Yes | |
| skipped | No | |
| best_use | Yes | Highest-scoring strategy id. |
| data_note | No | REIzer data tools that can refine this analysis (needs an API key). |
| disclaimer | No | Not financial advice — software estimate only. |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, but the description goes further: it warns that all rates/percents are fractions, states that omitted inputs are filled with documented defaults and listed in assumptions.estimated_fields, and notes it is free with no key. These are valuable behavioral details beyond what annotations provide.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by essential operational guidance (superset input, fractions, defaults, no key). Every sentence contributes meaningful information; there is no fluff or repetition of schema details.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the complex nested schema and multiple strategies, the description covers key behavior: skipping missing strategies, default handling, fraction convention, and where defaults are reported. An output schema exists, so return structure doesn't need explanation, and the description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds critical global semantics not uniformly present in the schema: sending a superset, all rates being fractions, and omitted fields getting defaults. This elevates the value beyond the structured schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Screen ONE property across every strategy...' and 'rank them by deal score', directly answering 'what is the best use of this property?'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like analyze_deal (single-deal analysis) and list_strategies (strategy listing).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It clearly instructs to 'Provide a superset of inputs' and explains that strategies missing inputs are skipped with reasons, which is key usage guidance. It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or alternative tools, but the 'best use' framing and sibling context make the intended use clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_strategiesList strategies and their inputsARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
List every supported strategy with its required and optional input fields. Call this first when unsure which inputs a strategy needs. Free, no key.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| strategies | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description adds value beyond these. It discloses that the tool is 'Free, no key' (no authentication required) and that it lists 'every supported strategy,' indicating a complete enumeration without filtering. This supplements the annotation-provided safety profile.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two concise sentences that front-load the main action, immediately state the usage recommendation, and add a practical note about cost/authentication. Every sentence provides distinct value, and there is no verbosity or repetition.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
This is a simple, parameterless tool with rich annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive) and an output schema. The description covers the full scope: what it lists, when to use it, and access requirements. No additional context is needed for an agent to correctly select and invoke this tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty (100% coverage by default). The per-rubric baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, but it does clarify what the output contains (required and optional input fields per strategy), which adds useful context.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'List every supported strategy with its required and optional input fields.' The verb 'list' and resource 'strategies' are specific, and the scope 'every supported strategy' distinguishes it from the sibling analysis/optimization tools. It unambiguously describes a discovery/metadata operation.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides explicit usage guidance: 'Call this first when unsure which inputs a strategy needs.' This establishes a clear use case and priority, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion criteria. The guidance is clear and actionable, fitting a score of 4.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
solve_max_offerSolve the maximum offerARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Reverse-solve the Maximum Allowable Offer: the highest purchase price that still meets every return target (defaults: CoC 8%, DSCR 1.20, cash flow ≥ 0; flip: 10% after-tax margin + 15% annualized ROI). Returns the MAO, the binding constraint, and per-target price ceilings. Strategies: ltr, str, brrr, multifamily, flip. Provide the deal inputs WITHOUT committing to a price; an asking price or arv, if known, anchors the price-based defaults, and with neither those defaults (taxes, insurance, closing) follow each price tested. Override targets via the targets object. All rates/percents are FRACTIONS (0.0675 = 6.75%). Omitted operating inputs are filled with documented defaults and listed in assumptions.estimated_fields. Free, no key.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| inputs | Yes | Deal inputs in camelCase engine keys. Anything omitted gets a documented default, listed back under assumptions.estimated_fields. price is optional here — an asking price or ARV anchors the price-derived defaults; without either, those defaults follow each price the solver tests. | |
| targets | No | Return targets the price must still satisfy. Omit to use each strategy's defaults. | |
| strategy | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| mao | Yes | Maximum allowable offer in dollars. |
| summary | Yes | |
| strategy | No | |
| disclaimer | No | Not financial advice — software estimate only. |
| metrics_at_mao | No | |
| binding_constraint | No | |
| ceilings_per_target | No |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds real behavioral context: returns MAO plus the binding constraint and per-target ceilings, omitted inputs get documented defaults surfaced in assumptions.estimated_fields, fraction convention for all rates, and 'Free, no key.' This goes meaningfully beyond the annotation safety profile.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Front-loads the core definition in the first clause, then layers constraints, strategy list, input guidance and conventions. Dense but nearly every sentence carries needed information; a few clauses (e.g. repeating the fraction rule for the targets object) are mildly redundant.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a nested, multi-strategy solver with an output schema, the description supplies everything an agent needs: strategies, required vs optional inputs, defaulting behavior, anchoring semantics, target overrides, rate convention, and a summary of what is returned.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 67% and the description adds value on top: it clarifies the fraction convention, states that price is optional and anchors price-derived defaults, explains that the targets object overrides strategy defaults, and lists valid strategies. That compensates for the undocumented parameter fraction.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource with scope: 'Reverse-solve the Maximum Allowable Offer: the highest purchase price that still meets every return target.' The word 'reverse-solve' implicitly contrasts with the analyze direction, letting an agent distinguish it from analyze_deal without opening schemas.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Gives clear operating guidance: 'Provide the deal inputs WITHOUT committing to a price,' with the note that an asking price or ARV anchors defaults. It does not explicitly name an alternative such as analyze_deal or state when NOT to use this tool, so it stops short of the top score.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
1 tool update
- Changed
solve_max_offer1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / inputs / descriptionPrevious value: -"Deal inputs in camelCase engine keys. Anything omitted gets a documented default, listed back under assumptions.estimated_fields. price is optional here — the asking price or ARV anchors the price-derived defaults while the solver searches."New value: +"Deal inputs in camelCase engine keys. Anything omitted gets a documented default, listed back under assumptions.estimated_fields. price is optional here — an asking price or ARV anchors the price-derived defaults; without either, those defaults follow each price the solver tests."
1 tool update
- Changed
analyze_deal1 field changed- changed
Output schema / properties / verdict / descriptionPrevious value: -"Strong / Solid / Thin / Weak."New value: +"Strong (85+) / Solid (70+) / Workable (50+) / Risky (25+) / Run Away."
1 tool update
- Changed
analyze_deal4 fields changed- added
Output schema / properties / breakdownAdded value: +{ + "description": "Ordered cash-flow / profit waterfall rows {label, amount, kind}; outflows are negative.", + "items": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" +} - added
Output schema / properties / leversAdded value: +{ + "description": "Top input changes that would each add ~$1,000/yr cash flow (STR).", + "items": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" +} - added
Output schema / properties / sensitivityAdded value: +{ + "description": "Which input drivers move the result most — {driver, range, low_impact, high_impact, swing}, sorted by swing (STR).", + "items": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" +} - added
Output schema / properties / upfrontAdded value: +{ + "description": "Cash-into-the-deal / project-cost stack rows {label, amount, kind}.", + "items": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" +}
1 tool update
- Changed
analyze_deal1 field changed- added
Output schema / properties / inputs_usedAdded value: +{ + "additionalProperties": true, + "description": "The resolved input set the analysis ran on — caller values plus documented defaults.", + "type": "object" +}
2 tool updates
- Changed
analyze_deal1 field changed- added
Output schema / properties / data_noteAdded value: +{ + "description": "REIzer data tools that can refine this analysis (needs an API key).", + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
best_use1 field changed- added
Output schema / properties / data_noteAdded value: +{ + "description": "REIzer data tools that can refine this analysis (needs an API key).", + "type": "string" +}
2 tool updates
- Removed
pull_comps - Removed
str_market_data
3 tool updates
- Changed
analyze_deal1 field changed- added
Output schema / properties / disclaimerAdded value: +{ + "description": "Not financial advice — software estimate only.", + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
best_use1 field changed- added
Output schema / properties / disclaimerAdded value: +{ + "description": "Not financial advice — software estimate only.", + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
solve_max_offer1 field changed- added
Output schema / properties / disclaimerAdded value: +{ + "description": "Not financial advice — software estimate only.", + "type": "string" +}
4 tool updates
- Changed
analyze_deal4 fields changed- added
Input schema / properties / inputs / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +true - changed
Input schema / properties / inputs / descriptionPrevious value: -"Deal inputs (camelCase engine keys — call list_strategies for each strategy's schema). Minimum: price + the income driver (marketRent / adr+occupancy / units / arv / land+build)."New value: +"Deal inputs in camelCase engine keys. Anything omitted gets a documented default, listed back under assumptions.estimated_fields. Minimum: price + the strategy's income driver (marketRent / adr+occupancy / units / arv / land+build). Call list_strategies for the full per-strategy schema." - added
Input schema / properties / inputs / propertiesAdded value: +{ + "adr": { + "description": "Average nightly rate in dollars. Required for str.", + "type": "number" + }, + "arv": { + "description": "After-repair value in dollars. Required for brrr and flip.", + "type": "number" + }, + "btsArv": { + "description": "Finished build-to-sell value in dollars. Required for newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "buildPsf": { + "description": "Build cost per square foot in dollars. Required for newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "downPct": { + "description": "Down payment. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent. Optional — a documented default applies.", + "type": "number" + }, + "insurance": { + "description": "Annual insurance in dollars. Optional.", + "type": "number" + }, + "landPrice": { + "description": "Land acquisition cost in dollars. Required for newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "livingSqft": { + "description": "Heated living area in square feet. Required for newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "marketRent": { + "description": "Expected monthly rent in dollars. Required for ltr and brrr.", + "type": "number" + }, + "occupancy": { + "description": "Expected occupancy. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent. Required for str.", + "type": "number" + }, + "price": { + "description": "Purchase price in dollars. Required for every strategy except newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "rate": { + "description": "Annual interest rate. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent. Optional.", + "type": "number" + }, + "rehabBudget": { + "description": "Renovation budget in dollars. Required for brrr and flip.", + "type": "number" + }, + "taxes": { + "description": "Annual property taxes in dollars. Optional.", + "type": "number" + }, + "term": { + "description": "Loan term in years. Optional.", + "type": "number" + }, + "units": { + "description": "Multifamily rent roll — {unitCount, avgRent, marketRent?} or an array of unit objects. Required for multifamily.", + "type": "object" + }, + "vacancyPct": { + "description": "Vacancy allowance. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent. Optional.", + "type": "number" + } +} - changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "additionalProperties": true, + "properties": { + "assumptions": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "description": "estimated_fields lists every input REIzer defaulted.", + "type": "object" + }, + "metrics": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "description": "Headline metrics for this strategy.", + "type": "object" + }, + "report_url": { + "description": "Shareable public report page (30 days).", + "type": "string" + }, + "score": { + "description": "0-100 deal score.", + "type": "number" + }, + "strategy": { + "type": "string" + }, + "stress": { + "description": "Stress scenarios, each with a verdict.", + "items": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "summary": { + "description": "Deterministic one-paragraph summary.", + "type": "string" + }, + "thresholds": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": [ + "object", + "null" + ] + }, + "verdict": { + "description": "Strong / Solid / Thin / Weak.", + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "strategy", + "score", + "verdict", + "metrics", + "summary" + ], + "type": "object" +}
- Changed
best_use4 fields changed- added
Input schema / properties / inputs / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +true - changed
Input schema / properties / inputs / descriptionPrevious value: -"One property's inputs — a superset across strategies."New value: +"Deal inputs in camelCase engine keys. Anything omitted gets a documented default, listed back under assumptions.estimated_fields. Send a SUPERSET across strategies — whatever you know. Strategies missing their required fields are skipped with a reason rather than failing the call." - added
Input schema / properties / inputs / propertiesAdded value: +{ + "adr": { + "description": "Average nightly rate in dollars. Required for str.", + "type": "number" + }, + "arv": { + "description": "After-repair value in dollars. Required for brrr and flip.", + "type": "number" + }, + "btsArv": { + "description": "Finished build-to-sell value in dollars. Required for newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "buildPsf": { + "description": "Build cost per square foot in dollars. Required for newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "downPct": { + "description": "Down payment. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent. Optional — a documented default applies.", + "type": "number" + }, + "insurance": { + "description": "Annual insurance in dollars. Optional.", + "type": "number" + }, + "landPrice": { + "description": "Land acquisition cost in dollars. Required for newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "livingSqft": { + "description": "Heated living area in square feet. Required for newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "marketRent": { + "description": "Expected monthly rent in dollars. Required for ltr and brrr.", + "type": "number" + }, + "occupancy": { + "description": "Expected occupancy. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent. Required for str.", + "type": "number" + }, + "price": { + "description": "Purchase price in dollars. Required for every strategy except newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "rate": { + "description": "Annual interest rate. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent. Optional.", + "type": "number" + }, + "rehabBudget": { + "description": "Renovation budget in dollars. Required for brrr and flip.", + "type": "number" + }, + "taxes": { + "description": "Annual property taxes in dollars. Optional.", + "type": "number" + }, + "term": { + "description": "Loan term in years. Optional.", + "type": "number" + }, + "units": { + "description": "Multifamily rent roll — {unitCount, avgRent, marketRent?} or an array of unit objects. Required for multifamily.", + "type": "object" + }, + "vacancyPct": { + "description": "Vacancy allowance. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent. Optional.", + "type": "number" + } +} - changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "additionalProperties": true, + "properties": { + "best_use": { + "description": "Highest-scoring strategy id.", + "type": "string" + }, + "note": { + "type": "string" + }, + "ranked": { + "items": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + }, + "skipped": { + "items": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + } + }, + "required": [ + "best_use", + "ranked" + ], + "type": "object" +}
- Changed
list_strategies1 field changed- changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "additionalProperties": true, + "properties": { + "strategies": { + "items": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "type": "array" + } + }, + "required": [ + "strategies" + ], + "type": "object" +}
- Changed
solve_max_offer7 fields changed- added
Input schema / properties / inputs / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +true - changed
Input schema / properties / inputs / descriptionPrevious value: -"Deal inputs (price optional — arv/asking anchors the defaults)."New value: +"Deal inputs in camelCase engine keys. Anything omitted gets a documented default, listed back under assumptions.estimated_fields. price is optional here — the asking price or ARV anchors the price-derived defaults while the solver searches." - added
Input schema / properties / inputs / propertiesAdded value: +{ + "adr": { + "description": "Average nightly rate in dollars. Required for str.", + "type": "number" + }, + "arv": { + "description": "After-repair value in dollars. Required for brrr and flip.", + "type": "number" + }, + "btsArv": { + "description": "Finished build-to-sell value in dollars. Required for newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "buildPsf": { + "description": "Build cost per square foot in dollars. Required for newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "downPct": { + "description": "Down payment. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent. Optional — a documented default applies.", + "type": "number" + }, + "insurance": { + "description": "Annual insurance in dollars. Optional.", + "type": "number" + }, + "landPrice": { + "description": "Land acquisition cost in dollars. Required for newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "livingSqft": { + "description": "Heated living area in square feet. Required for newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "marketRent": { + "description": "Expected monthly rent in dollars. Required for ltr and brrr.", + "type": "number" + }, + "occupancy": { + "description": "Expected occupancy. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent. Required for str.", + "type": "number" + }, + "price": { + "description": "Purchase price in dollars. Required for every strategy except newc.", + "type": "number" + }, + "rate": { + "description": "Annual interest rate. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent. Optional.", + "type": "number" + }, + "rehabBudget": { + "description": "Renovation budget in dollars. Required for brrr and flip.", + "type": "number" + }, + "taxes": { + "description": "Annual property taxes in dollars. Optional.", + "type": "number" + }, + "term": { + "description": "Loan term in years. Optional.", + "type": "number" + }, + "units": { + "description": "Multifamily rent roll — {unitCount, avgRent, marketRent?} or an array of unit objects. Required for multifamily.", + "type": "object" + }, + "vacancyPct": { + "description": "Vacancy allowance. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent. Optional.", + "type": "number" + } +} - added
Input schema / properties / targets / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +true - changed
Input schema / properties / targets / descriptionPrevious value: -"Optional target overrides, e.g. {\"cocReturn\": 0.10, \"dscr\": 1.25}."New value: +"Return targets the price must still satisfy. Omit to use each strategy's defaults." - added
Input schema / properties / targets / propertiesAdded value: +{ + "afterTaxAnnualROI": { + "description": "Flip: minimum annualized after-tax ROI. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent.", + "type": "number" + }, + "afterTaxMargin": { + "description": "Flip: minimum after-tax profit margin. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent.", + "type": "number" + }, + "capitalRecovery": { + "description": "BRRRR: minimum share of invested cash returned at refi. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent.", + "type": "number" + }, + "cocReturn": { + "description": "Minimum cash-on-cash return. Expressed as a FRACTION (0.0675 = 6.75%), never a percent.", + "type": "number" + }, + "dscr": { + "description": "Minimum debt-service coverage ratio, e.g. 1.25.", + "type": "number" + }, + "monthlyCF": { + "description": "Minimum monthly cash flow in dollars.", + "type": "number" + } +} - changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "additionalProperties": true, + "properties": { + "binding_constraint": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "ceilings_per_target": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "mao": { + "description": "Maximum allowable offer in dollars.", + "type": "number" + }, + "metrics_at_mao": { + "additionalProperties": true, + "type": "object" + }, + "strategy": { + "type": "string" + }, + "summary": { + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "mao", + "summary" + ], + "type": "object" +}
2 tool updates
- Changed
pull_comps8 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / addressRemoved value: -{ - "description": "Subject property address.", - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / cityAdded value: +{ + "type": "string" +} - added
Input schema / properties / rentCountAdded value: +{ + "description": "Rental comps to return (default 10).", + "type": "number" +} - added
Input schema / properties / saleCountAdded value: +{ + "description": "Comparable sales to return (default 10).", + "type": "number" +} - added
Input schema / properties / stateAdded value: +{ + "description": "Two-letter state, e.g. \"MN\".", + "type": "string" +} - added
Input schema / properties / streetAdded value: +{ + "description": "Street address incl. house number, e.g. \"812 7th St SE\".", + "type": "string" +} - added
Input schema / properties / zipAdded value: +{ + "type": "string" +} - changed
Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[ - "address" -]New value: +[ + "street", + "city", + "state" +]
- Changed
str_market_data7 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / addressRemoved value: -{ - "description": "Location or subject address.", - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / bathsAdded value: +{ + "type": "number" +} - added
Input schema / properties / bedroomsAdded value: +{ + "description": "Bedrooms filter (default 2).", + "type": "number" +} - added
Input schema / properties / guestsAdded value: +{ + "type": "number" +} - added
Input schema / properties / latitudeAdded value: +{ + "type": "number" +} - added
Input schema / properties / longitudeAdded value: +{ + "type": "number" +} - changed
Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[ - "address" -]New value: +[ + "latitude", + "longitude" +]
6 tool updates
- First observed
analyze_deal - First observed
best_use - First observed
list_strategies - First observed
pull_comps - First observed
solve_max_offer - First observed
str_market_data
Related MCP Connectors
Real-estate underwriting, BRRRR, comps, valuation, distress search, rent-roll and T12 parsing.
Free CRE loan sizing, DSCR stress tests, payments, closing costs and cited lending knowledge.
Lender-grade real estate underwriting and deal reports: fix and flip, BRRRR, new construction.
Real estate deal analysis from chat: rental underwriting, buy-box matching, deal library, docs.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceMultifamily real estate deal analysis — analyze deals, score properties, calculate max offer prices, and look up market data. Four tools for underwriting 2-200 unit apartment properties.4377 npm4MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceLandlord and rental-property calculators as MCP tools: cash flow, cap rate, DSCR, Airbnb break-even occupancy, rent late fees, lease notice dates, and IRS mileage. Offline and deterministic, with no dependencies.MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA headless MCP connector that lets you underwrite commercial and multifamily deals inside a Claude chat, providing exact arithmetic for NOI, valuation, debt sizing, DSCR, and returns.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI agents to find vetted, daily-scored US residential real-estate investment deals with pay-per-request via USDC on Base.3 npmMIT
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.