ekkor

booboooking_book

Book an appointment on booboooking.com (free OR paid services — payment is always in cash at the appointment, no online payment). customer_name, customer_email and customer_phone are the customer's own details, confirmed by the user. customer_phone is validated as international E.164 (+ and country code, no spaces or dashes, e.g. +36201234567); a local-format number is rejected. On success the response includes the reservation id and pin, both needed to look up or cancel the booking, and optionally cash_due: { amount, currency }, the amount payable in cash at the appointment.

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": {
      "provider": "<provider>",
      "service_id": "<service_id>",
      "date": "<date>",
      "time": "<time>"
    },
    "name": "booboooking_book"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	Yes	Date in YYYYMMDD format (e.g. "20260415")
`time`	Yes	Start time in HH:MM format (e.g. "09:30") — use the "time" field from booboooking_check_availability results
`provider`	Yes	Provider identifier
`service_id`	Yes	Service ID from booboooking_list_services
`customer_name`	No	Customer full name
`customer_email`	No	Customer email address
`customer_phone`	No	Customer phone number in international E.164 format, e.g. "+36201234567" — convert local-format numbers (e.g. "06201234567") before calling this tool.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 20, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With annotations declaring only the mutation/idempotency profile, the description adds substantial behavior: no online payment is taken, the phone is validated as E.164 and local formats are rejected, and a successful call returns `id` and `pin` required for later lookup or cancellation plus an optional `cash_due` amount. These are exactly the facts an agent needs and none are recoverable from the annotations.

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?

One dense paragraph, front-loaded with the action and payment scope, then the customer-identity caveat, then the return payload. Every sentence carries information, though the parenthetical payment clause and the phone-format clause make the middle slightly run-on.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 7-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the important gaps: return values (`id`, `pin`, `cash_due`) and a concrete failure mode (phone rejected). It stops short of describing what happens on an unavailable slot or duplicate booking, which for an explicitly non-idempotent write is a remaining 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%, so the schema already documents formats; the description goes further by attributing customer_name/email/phone to the customer's own confirmed details and by stating the consequence of a local-format phone (rejected), not just the pattern. Minor repetition of the E.164 rule keeps it just short of a 5.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ("Book an appointment on booboooking.com") and scopes it (free or paid services, cash only). That distinguishes it from the read-only siblings (check_availability, get_booking, list_services) and from cancel, though the siblings are never named explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It clarifies the payment model and the requirement that customer details be confirmed by the user, which is useful context for invoking it. However, it never states the expected call order (e.g., list_services then check_availability before booking) nor what to do when a slot is taken — that ordering only appears indirectly in the schema's parameter descriptions.

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

All ekkor tools Inspect

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

Need Help?