A
licenseA
qualityD
maintenanceOpen-source MCP server providing real estate regulatory intelligence (zoning, permits, entitlements, deal scoring) for US properties, enabling AI agents to access 10 callable tools.
12
5 npm
MIT
real-estate-ai
by CSOAI-ORG
Click on "Deploy Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@real-estate-aiAnalyze property at 123 Main St for compliance risks."
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
Real Estate Ai
MEOK AI Labs — real-estate-ai MCP Server
MEOK AI Labs — real-estate-ai MCP Server
🚀 Quick Start
# Install via pip
pip install real_estate_ai
# Or install via Smithery
npx -y @smithery/cli@latest install real-estate-ai --client claudeRelated MCP server: attestix
✨ Features
MCP protocol compliant
Easy installation
Well-documented API
Production-ready
Active maintenance
📖 Documentation
🛡️ Compliance
This MCP server is built with EU AI Act compliance built-in:
✅ Article 9 — Risk Management System
✅ Article 13 — Transparency & Instructions for Use
✅ Article 15 — Bias Detection & Testing
✅ Article 26 — FRIA Support (where applicable)
✅ Article 50 — AI Content Watermarking (where applicable)
Need help getting compliant? Book a free 15-min diagnostic →
🏢 Enterprise
Need custom development, SLA guarantees, or white-label deployment?
Pro: $99/mo — Full MCP suite + EU AI Act tracking
Enterprise: $499/mo — Custom dev + SLA + Dedicated support
View Pricing → | Contact Sales →
🤝 Part of the MEOK Ecosystem
This server is part of the MEOK AI Labs ecosystem — 300+ MCP servers for sovereign AI governance.
Domain | Purpose |
EU AI Act compliance marketplace | |
AI safety & monitoring | |
Sovereign AI platform | |
Legacy modernization |
📜 License
MIT © CSOAI-ORG
Available Tools
1 toolreal_estate_ai_complianceB
Assess regulatory compliance for AI in real estate. Covers fair housing, automated valuation, tenant screening, and advertising discrimination.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| system_name | Yes | Name of real estate AI system | |
| ai_function | Yes | Function (automated valuation/AVM, tenant screening, ad targeting, property recommendation, smart building) | |
| data_inputs | Yes | Data inputs (property data, credit, criminal, demographics, satellite imagery, social) | |
| fair_housing_impact | Yes | Impact on protected classes (race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability, familial status) | |
| jurisdiction | Yes | Operating jurisdiction (US/FHA, EU, UK, Australia, etc.) |
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'assess regulatory compliance', implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly mention that it is non-destructive, required permissions, rate limits, or any side effects. This lack of detail leaves behavioral assumptions ambiguous.
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 a single sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's core purpose and scope. It is front-loaded with the main action 'Assess regulatory compliance' and concisely lists coverage areas without unnecessary words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool has 5 required parameters and no output schema, the description does not explain what the output contains (e.g., compliance score, recommendations, citations). It only hints at the topics covered, leaving the agent to guess the result format. The tool's context is incomplete for effective use.
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 100%, so the schema itself documents all 5 parameters. The description adds overall context (e.g., covering fair housing, automated valuation) but does not add specific meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. Thus, it meets the baseline for high coverage without extra value.
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 clearly states the tool assesses regulatory compliance for AI in real estate and lists specific areas like fair housing, automated valuation, tenant screening, and advertising discrimination. The verb 'assess' and resource 'regulatory compliance' are specific, and the scope distinguishes it from general compliance tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. Sibling tools are absent, so the description relies on implied usage from the purpose. However, it does not specify when not to use it or provide exclusions.
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
v1.0.0- First observed
real_estate_ai_compliance
TDQS
A3.7/5.0
Scored across 1 tool
Disambiguation5/5
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion between tools. The tool 'real_estate_ai_compliance' has a clear, distinct purpose.
Naming Consistency5/5
The single tool name uses a consistent snake_case convention. While a verb_noun pattern is absent, the naming is predictable and descriptive for the domain.
Tool Count3/5
A single tool is at the lower bound of typical scoping. The domain of real estate AI compliance is broad, but the tool claims to cover multiple aspects, making the count borderline acceptable.
Completeness4/5
The tool covers major compliance areas like fair housing, valuation, tenant screening, and advertising discrimination. Minor gaps (e.g., data privacy) may exist, but overall it serves the domain well.
Maintenance
ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessNo issues
Related MCP Connectors
AI governance MCP server for EU AI Act compliance and jurisdiction verification
MCP server giving Claude AI access to 22+ NYC public-record databases for real estate due diligence
EU compliance corpus across 8 frameworks (NIS2, DORA, AI Act, ISO 27001 + more) via MCP.
Geospatial AI MCP server — satellite imagery, embeddings, weather, GNS governance
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceMCP server for compliance automation of AI agents, enabling EU AI Act compliance, verifiable credentials, and decentralized identity management with 47 tools across 9 modules.15 PyPI17Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceMCP server for EU AI Act compliance in employment AI, featuring built-in risk management, bias detection, transparency, and FRIA support.2MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceAn MCP server for AI economy infrastructure with built-in EU AI Act compliance, supporting risk management, transparency, and bias detection.10MIT