Rentvine MCP

list_units

Retrieve all units for a property from Rentvine using the property name or address fragment, including address, vacancy status, rent, and deposit.

Instructions

List units for a property from Rentvine (live data). Returns unit address, vacancy status, rent amount, and deposit.

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": {
      "property_name": "<property_name>"
    },
    "name": "list_units"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`property_name`	Yes	The property name or address fragment as it appears in your Rentvine portfolio.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.2Sep 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It adds one behavioral clue: 'live data', which indicates a real‑time fetch rather than cached data. However, it does not disclose error behavior (e.g., unknown property), permissions, pagination, or any side effects, though the word 'list' implies a read-only operation.

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 two concise sentences. The first sentence names the action and resource; the second lists the returned fields. There is no redundant or vague wording, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

The tool is simple (1 required parameter, no output schema). The description compensates for the missing output schema by enumerating the returned fields. It falls short in not describing potential error or empty-list behavior, but that is not critical for a basic list endpoint.

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?

The input schema already has 100% parameter coverage with a clear description of 'property_name'. The tool description only restates that units are 'for a property' and does not add extra meaning or constraints beyond the schema.

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 action ('List units'), the resource ('units'), and the context ('for a property'). It also names the specific returned fields (address, vacancy status, rent amount, deposit), making it distinct from sibling list tools like list_properties or list_leases.

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?

Usage is implied by the phrase 'for a property' and the required 'property_name' parameter, but no explicit guidance or exclusions are provided. The description does not mention when to prefer this tool over list_properties or how to first obtain a property name.

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