Every inquiry asks for the same missing details.

What tends to slip

Inquiries arrive from several places and look different each time. One person wants a showing. Another wants to know if a listing is still available. A third is not ready and will go quiet if nobody replies while the agent is in an appointment.

The follow-up is only as good as the note. “Call them back” is not a note. The agent needs what they asked, how they want to be reached, and what should happen next.

What we would build

An intake path that sorts a question from a showing request, asks the few details that change the next step, and writes a note an agent can act on. An answering layer can cover the approved facts about how you work. It should not invent listing advice.

• A distinction between a question, a showing request, and a new client conversation
• The contact details and timing captured once
• A handoff that does not promise a showing that is not on the calendar
• Language an agent can live with, because they will read it every day

What we would not assume

We would not assume a connection to a listing service, and we would not put an application in the role of advisor. If a link to a tool you already use is sensible, discovery is where that is decided. The first value is a complete note and a faster reply to the questions that are safe.

Questions

Can it answer questions about a specific property?

Only with facts you have approved. Anything that is advice, negotiation, or a guess about the market belongs to the agent.

Is this for a team or a single agent?

Either. A single agent often feels the missed inquiry more, because there is no desk behind them.

Keep going

• Booking and intake
• Phone answering
• What custom AI can actually do
• Tell us about this