Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

onehome-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Resolve a OneHome listing by street address

onehome_get_by_address
Read-onlyIdempotent

Resolve a free-text street address (with optional city/state/zip) to a OneHome listing's canonical URL and ID in one call. Returns match details or a clear no-listing-found response.

Instructions

Resolve a free-text street address (with optional city/state/zip) to a OneHome listing's canonical portal URL and id in one call. Walks a 2-rung ladder: (1) ListingSuggestionsSearch against the magic-link saved-search scope; (2) when that misses, search-fallback — page-walks the broader saved-search (or raw listings(groupId)) pool bounded by the same groupId and fuzzy-matches input address tokens. Returns { url, listing_id, address, resolved, matched_via } where matched_via: "suggestions" | "search_fallback" reports which rung produced the hit. When no listing matches, returns { resolved: false, error: "no listing found" } rather than throwing. Read-only; safe to call repeatedly.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
zipNoZIP code, e.g. "28746"
cityNoe.g. "Lake Lure"
viewNoResponse shape: "compact" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; "full" returns every field this server understands. compact strips image/avatar URLs from the response; "full" returns OneHome's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which OneHome fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.
stateNoTwo-letter state abbreviation, e.g. "NC"
addressYesStreet address line, e.g. "126 Sleeping Bear Ln".
group_idNoOptional OneHome group id to scope the suggestion search. Defaults to the magic-link session context when present.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.15.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / view
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Response shape: \"compact\" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; \"full\" returns every field this server understands. compact strips image/avatar URLs from the response; \"full\" returns OneHome's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which OneHome fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.",
+  "enum": [
+    "compact",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observedv0.13.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, and the description reinforces these ('Read-only; safe to call repeatedly'). It adds significant behavioral detail beyond annotations: the two-rung ladder (suggestions then search-fallback), the output structure including 'matched_via', the non-throwing error behavior, and the bounded search pool by groupId. This goes well beyond the structured fields.

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 dense but well-organized, front-loading the core purpose and then logically detailing the mechanism, output, error case, and safety. It is longer than necessary but every sentence adds information—no fluff or redundancy. The structure aids comprehension, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5 due to slight length.

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?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description fully specifies the return shape ({url, listing_id, address, resolved, matched_via}) and the error case. It also explains the fallback algorithm and scoping. The input parameters are well-documented in the schema, and the description clarifies behavioral nuances like the 'view' enum. No critical information for correct invocation is missing, though rate limits or auth requirements are not mentioned (annotations do not cover them either).

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 each parameter (address, zip, city, state, group_id, view) already has a clear description. The description adds context about how group_id scopes the suggestion search and the fallback pool, and clarifies the 'view' parameter's impact on response shape. This adds some semantic value beyond the schema, but the schema already carries the primary meanings, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool resolves a free-text street address to a OneHome listing's canonical portal URL and id, with a specific verb ('Resolve') and resource ('OneHome listing'). It describes the output and the two-step mechanism, making the purpose unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly contrast with the similar sibling 'onehome_resolve_addresses', which might handle bulk or different scenarios, so differentiation is only implicit.

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?

The description implies usage for a single address resolution and explains the fallback ladder, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives like 'onehome_resolve_addresses' or when not to use it. The context of being a one-call single-address resolver is present but without explicit exclusions or alternative guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools