List all booking verticals Agentorist currently supports.
Returns a dict with each vertical's name and description. Call this first to discover what's bookable before constructing other tool calls.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint: true. The description adds behavioral details about the return structure (dict with name and description) and usage ordering, which adds value beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description has two sentences: the first states purpose, the second adds return format and usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the return value and provides usage context. For a no-parameter tool, it is sufficiently complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There are no parameters (0 params), and schema description coverage is 100%. Per the guidelines, baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter info.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'List' and resource 'all booking verticals', and specifies the return format as a dict with name and description. It distinguishes from sibling tools by advising to call it first to discover what is bookable.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly says 'Call this first to discover what's bookable before constructing other tool calls', giving clear when-to-use context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternatives, though the sibling context fills some gaps.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clear, distinct role: discovery (search, search_all, list_verticals, list_venues), options (find_options), booking (book), and user feedback (request_unsupported_booking). No two tools perform the same function.
Some tools follow verb_noun (list_venues, list_verticals, find_options, request_unsupported_booking), while others are single verbs or verb_adverb (book, search, search_all). The inconsistency in pattern may confuse an agent.
Seven tools is well-scoped for a booking discovery service. Each tool covers a necessary step in the user journey without being overwhelming or sparse.
The set covers the core workflow: discover verticals, search, get options, book, and flag unsupported requests. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool to view or cancel bookings), but these are beyond the stated purpose.
