I saw you’re still actively working through the MLS/Google Maps scenario.
Rather than trying to solve the whole valuation model upfront, I’d start with one failing property request and trace it end-to-end:
website webhook → address/Maps data → MLS request → field mapping → report response.
My strongest background is API/webhook integrations, JSON/data mapping, validation and workflow reliability. I haven’t worked with your specific MLS provider, so I’d rather prove the fit on one bounded technical issue than overstate that experience.
I can offer a $100 fixed first diagnostic/repair milestone: identify the failing step, fix one agreed API/mapping path where feasible, test it against a normal case plus one missing-data/error case, and hand over the corrected workflow with short notes.
Relevant systems work:
If this is still useful, which MLS provider are you using, and is the current scenario failing with an error or completing with an incorrect/empty report?
Hi Mark — I’m an AI/automation engineer with a degree in Architecture and Urbanism. That combination is useful here: I can examine both the property logic and the API/webhook path instead of treating this as only a Make configuration issue.
I can start with a $100 fixed diagnostic, credited toward the implementation:
inspect the current scenario and redacted execution bundles;
define one defensible ruleset for one market and property type;
test five cases: valid property, no match, multiple comps, incomplete address, and API failure;
deliver findings plus a fixed completion scope within 48 hours of receiving the materials.
My verifiable work is in Python/FastAPI/n8n API workflows with validation, retries, deduplication, and human review. I won’t claim a prior production MLS deployment; my Architecture and Urbanism background is the relevant domain advantage.
Which MLS API are you using, and does the current scenario error, return empty results, or produce implausible values?
Mark, is this still open as a paid project? Which MLS API are you using, where does the current scenario fail, and what budget and deadline do you have? I’d propose a fixed-price first stage around one anonymised property example: webhook → Google Maps → MLS → report, checked against your agreed valuation rules and expected output. I’d quote it after reviewing that example and keep the bot separate. Please don’t post API keys, private MLS records or client data here.
Hi Mark — if help is still needed, I can propose a USD75 first milestone for one confirmed API-request or field-mapping repair in your existing scenario, subject to reviewing a sanitised failing example.
Scope: one webhook input through the affected MLS/Maps module to your agreed report fields. Acceptance: one valid example matches the expected fields; one missing-data/error case is explicitly flagged. Deliverables: corrected Make blueprint, recorded checks and brief setup notes. Valuation formulas, appraisals and the bot are outside this milestone.
Estimated time is 1–2 working days after sample review and agreement on scope, environment and payment terms. Existing Make/API usage costs need to be agreed first.
Codex would perform implementation and automated checks autonomously, without human review. I have no Make/MLS client project to claim; my synthetic CSV demo demonstrates data validation only.
Which MLS provider and module are involved? Could you share a sanitised error/input/output example, without keys or private client/property records, and confirm whether this AI execution arrangement suits you?
Mark — I can take a bounded first stage on the existing scenario and keep the bot separate. I’d scope it at $175 fixed: trace one sanitized property end-to-end (website webhook → Google Maps normalization → MLS request/mapping → report response), fix one agreed API/mapping defect where feasible, test a normal case plus one missing-data/API-failure case, and hand over the corrected flow with short notes. My verified strength is API/webhook integrations, data mapping, debugging and reliability; I won’t claim a prior MLS production deployment. If this is still open, which MLS API are you using, where does the run currently fail, and can you share a redacted scenario export/screenshot plus one failing input/output example? Please keep API keys, private MLS records and client data out of the thread. If the issue is broader than one defect, I’ll stop and quote the next stage before doing more. — Yehor Rodionov | https://fored.id/
I saw your real estate evaluation project. Since the scenario and APIs are already in place, the key challenge is correctly mapping the MLS, Google Maps, and property parameters so the report works reliably across different cases.
We can help troubleshoot and complete the workflow, and the same setup can later be extended into a real estate bot. I’d be happy to review where you’re currently stuck.
I can help isolate one blocker in your existing MLS/Google Maps report scenario. I’d use a sample property and the report you expect, so the first milestone has a concrete result to check.
My initial review would cover:
What the website sends and expects back: a completed report in the same request, or confirmation followed by later delivery.
Whether Google Maps identifies the intended property, and whether the MLS request uses the correct identifiers, filters and units.
Where the returned data stops matching the report fields and your approved valuation rules.
I’d then agree one request/mapping repair, work on a saved copy, and test the result against the sample. I’d also check that a missing or ambiguous address produces a clear result for the user. The handover would include the corrected blueprint, before/after test results and short change notes.
My rate is $30 USD/hour. For a contained repair, the preliminary estimate is 2–4 hours ($60–$120), with a target of one working day after scope and access are agreed. I’ll confirm feasibility and a spending cap after reviewing a sanitized example. The cap includes testing and one correction pass; any broader work requires a separate agreement.
You would approve the valuation parameters. The bot can follow once the report flow is working. Make/API usage stays on your accounts, with any additional service costs agreed before we incur them.
If you’re still hiring, which MLS provider do you use, and does the scenario error or complete with an empty/incorrect report? Please share a sanitized blueprint or module screenshots and one expected input/output example, with keys and personal data removed.
I use AI-assisted development and testing and can work asynchronously. We can agree a payment method, with payment on acceptance of the first milestone.
Mark — since the scenario already exists and both APIs are in place, the parameters aren’t the first problem; the first problem is knowing which module actually breaks. I’d take one address you know the answer for, run it through webhook → Maps → MLS → report on a copy of your scenario, and hand you a pass/fail check you can rerun yourself, as a small fixed-price milestone. When you run it right now, does it stop with an error on the MLS module, or does it finish and just produce an empty or wrong report?
I came across your post and actually, this is a pretty interesting setup.
MLS + Google Maps can get tricky once you start accounting for all the different property data and evaluation variables.
I’ve worked with Make on similar API-heavy automations, so I know how quickly the parameters can get messy.
I am curious about the scenario you’ve already built though.
What part are you getting stuck on?
I hope to discuss the details with you.
Feel free to reach me out.
For your report, I would trace one property submission from the website through the MLS and Google Maps calls into the report output. I would check the field mappings against an example you already trust and apply your agreed valuation rules.
I suggest a USD 150 diagnostic as the first paid milestone: reproduce the problem, identify the failing call or mapping, and give you a repair scope and acceptance test. That covers up to two hours reviewing a sanitized scenario and sample data. A repair quote would follow once the cause is clear; the bot can be a separate project.
Which MLS provider are you using, and does the scenario return an error, empty results, or an incorrect report? A redacted blueprint and one example would help confirm whether the diagnostic fits.
Hi Mark - you already have the hard parts (scenario + MLS + Maps). What usually blocks this stage is the parameter layer, not the API layer: property type and geography need their own mapping rules before the webhook can return a consistent figure, and the valuation logic has to be separated from the report formatting.
I’ve done regulated data-mapping work where wrong parameters were the actual failure point. Happy to look at your existing scenario and tell you which of the two layers is broken before you spend anything - send a screenshot of the module where it fails.
If you are already sorted with someone, ignore this.
The parameter you are stuck on is almost certainly the definition of a comparable, because everything downstream hangs off it. Before the MLS call you need three decisions written down: the radius or the neighbourhood boundary, the window in months, and the property filters that must match — type, bedrooms, and a living-area band rather than an exact figure.
The practical order in Make: geocode the subject address with Google Maps first and keep the coordinates, then query MLS on those coordinates rather than on the text address, because the text form of an address is never stable enough to match on. Then filter, then drop the outliers before you average — one renovated flip in the set moves the number more than any weighting will.
And decide now what the report does when it finds fewer than, say, five comparables: it should say so on the page rather than quietly average two. That single rule is what keeps an automated valuation defensible.
That is the shape of the work. If you want, I can go through your existing scenario with you and tell you what is missing before anyone talks about building anything.
Hi Mark, are you still looking for paid help with this scenario? I can investigate the webhook → MLS/Google Maps → report flow, starting with one failing sample and the expected output. A redacted blueprint and response/error example would let us define a small, testable first milestone; please keep API keys and customer data private.
I’m a software engineer in Korea, available 20–25 hours/week and communicating in written English. I use AI-assisted coding/configuration with testing. Would async remote work fit, and what budget/deadline do you have for fixing the existing scenario? We can treat the real-estate bot as a separate scope.
Mark — the line in your post that matters most is “real estate is very wide range”.
That’s the actual blocker, not the parameters. A valuation scenario that tries to handle
every property type at once never finishes, because there’s always one more field.
So I’d start by narrowing it with you, not by opening your scenario. One property type,
one market, and an agreed list of what goes into the report and what doesn’t. Once that’s
written down, configuring the MLS and Maps calls against it is straightforward work —
you already have both APIs, which is the part that usually holds these up.
$700 to take it from “created but not configured” to a working report you can put on the
site, about a week. That includes deciding the scope with you, wiring the parameters,
handling the properties where MLS data comes back thin, and making the webhook fail
visibly instead of silently.
$150/month after that if you want it maintained — MLS feeds change their fields more often
than people expect, and a valuation form that quietly returns nonsense is worse than one
that’s down.
On the real estate bot you mentioned: that’s a separate build and I’d rather not bundle it
into the same quote and rush both. Roughly $600 for an assistant that answers from your
own listings and your own content, tells people when it doesn’t know instead of inventing
a number, and hands off to you. Happy to scope it properly once the valuation form is live
and you’ve seen how I work.
One question: is the report for visitors to read on the page, or is it a lead magnet you
email in exchange for contact details? Those are different builds — the second one needs
the CRM path thought through from the start.
Hi Mark — since you already have the scenario and APIs, I wouldn’t rebuild this from scratch.
I’d first isolate one failing path, trace the input through the MLS / Google Maps calls, and compare the expected result with what the current scenario actually returns.
If you can share:
a redacted blueprint or screenshot,
one sample input,
and what the correct output should be,
I can tell you whether this can be scoped as one bounded paid repair.
My strongest current proof is workflow reliability and API logic in CLEAR MERIT’s Internal / Working Demo, so I don’t want to overstate direct MLS production experience.
If the problem is mainly parameter mapping, request formatting, response parsing, or result normalization, that’s exactly the kind of narrow issue I’d start with rather than rebuilding the entire workflow.
Hi Mark, are you still looking for someone to finish this? I build and repair Make workflows, including a business-listing system I rebuilt and cut over after all 32 acceptance tests passed. That work included checking submitted information, preventing duplicate listings and verifying the finished drafts.
For your existing scenario, I’d start with one property example and the report you expect. That would let me separate any MLS/Maps request problems from the report rules, then agree a small paid repair with clear tests. You would approve the valuation rules; I would handle the integration and make missing or ambiguous data visible instead of producing a misleading result. I haven’t worked with your particular MLS provider, so I’d need to check its documentation first.
We can work through the scope in messages, and leave the bot for later. Which MLS provider are you using, and does the current run fail or return the wrong report?