Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

HomeMaster

by co.homemaster
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Check a booking request

booking_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Where a request_booking request stands. A home cleaning reference (hmr_): waiting for the customer on WhatsApp, declined, expired, awaiting payment (with the payment link), finding a cleaning expert, booked (with the next visit), done or cancelled; for changes, the customer messages Helen on WhatsApp. A call-back reference (hmc_): booked with its window, called, or closed; to move it, call request_booking again with a new window. A direct booking reference (hmb_): its status, whether it is paid, and its visits. A checkout link has no reference: what the customer books on the page is followed by Helen on WhatsApp. Never includes the customer's details.

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": {
      "reference": "<reference>"
    },
    "name": "booking_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
referenceYesThe reference request_booking returned (starts with hmr_, hmc_ or hmb_).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / reference / description
      Previous value: -"The reference request_booking returned (starts with hmr_ or hmc_)."New value: +"The reference request_booking returned (starts with hmr_, hmc_ or hmb_)."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / reference / description
      Previous value: -"The reference request_booking returned (starts with hmr_)."New value: +"The reference request_booking returned (starts with hmr_ or hmc_)."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds real substance: the exact status vocabulary returned per prefix, that the payment link and next visit are included, and the explicit privacy constraint 'Never includes the customer's details.' That last point is behavior an agent cannot get from annotations or schema.

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?

Every clause carries information, but the writing is one long semicolon chain with some repetition of the WhatsApp-escape path (once for hmr_ changes, once for checkout links). The key point — it is a status lookup, read-only — is not front-loaded as a lead sentence.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description effectively substitutes for one by describing what comes back for each reference type. Only error/unknown-reference behavior is unstated, which is a minor gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already states the reference must start with hmr_/hmc_/hmb_. The description goes further by explaining what each prefix categorically means (home cleaning ref, call-back ref, direct booking ref), which changes how the agent interprets the result. It doesn't describe invalid or unknown reference handling.

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?

States a specific resource ('Where a request_booking request stands') and then enumerates concrete returnable states per reference prefix (hmr_ statuses, hmc_ states, hmb_ status/paid/visits). This lets an agent distinguish it from request_booking and the other siblings without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It routes changes away from this tool toward a named sibling ('to move it, call request_booking again with a new window') and warns that a checkout link has no reference, so it is not callable there. What's missing is a plain 'call this when the customer asks about an existing request' framing, but the implied usage is unambiguous.

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

All HomeMaster toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources