List available services for a provider on booboooking.com. Returns service names, IDs, duration, and price. Call this first to find the service ID needed for availability and booking.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| provider | Yes | Provider identifier (e.g. "radnaimark", "tomi") |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds value by revealing the exact output content (service names, IDs, duration, price) and the tool's role as the entry point for the workflow, which is especially useful since no output schema is present.
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?
Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states purpose and returns; the second provides indispensable sequencing guidance. Every word earns its place, and the content is front-loaded.
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?
For a simple single-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it names the input domain, states the return contents, and explains the tool's role in the broader operation. An agent has all it needs to call it correctly.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with the single 'provider' parameter already well-documented via examples. The description does not add further parameter-level detail, but it reinforces that the provider is the input required to scope the service list. This matches the baseline for high schema coverage.
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 uses a specific verb-resource pair ('List available services for a provider') and explicitly states the returned data ('service names, IDs, duration, and price'). It also differentiates itself from siblings by positioning as the prerequisite for availability and booking tools.
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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this first to find the service ID needed for availability and booking.' This clearly instructs an agent to invoke this tool before its booking and availability siblings, even though it doesn't name them explicitly.
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 role, but check_availability and find_next_available both deal with finding open slots and could be confused by an agent. The descriptions do distinguish them (specific dates vs. next available), so the overlap is manageable.
All tools share the booboooking_ prefix and use snake_case, which creates a consistent family. There is minor inconsistency between bare verbs like book and cancel versus more descriptive verb_object names like check_availability and list_services.
Six tools is well-scoped for an appointment booking server: service discovery, availability checking, booking, retrieval, and cancellation. Each tool serves a necessary part of the booking workflow with no obvious bloat.
The toolset covers the full booking lifecycle: list services, check availability, book, view booking, and cancel. A reschedule/update tool or a way to list all bookings for a customer would improve coverage, but the primary use case is complete.