Skip to main content
Glama

yesmcp

by com.yesmcp

List available consultation windows

list_availability
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists yesmcp's genuinely bookable consultation windows — only real, future, unclaimed slots. Use it before book_consult; the slotId of the window the user picks is what book_consult needs. Times are returned in yesmcp's timezone with an explicit UTC offset (for example 2026-08-27 14:00 CEST (UTC+2)). Before you confirm anything with the user, ask which timezone or city they are in, then state the slot in BOTH their timezone and yesmcp's. Never show a bare wall-clock time. If nothing is open in the period asked about, the tool names the next available window instead of returning an empty list. Directory reviewers: pass review_access with the token from the submitted test-prompt list to see the seeded [TEST] reviewer windows instead of real availability. Do not use it for real users.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoLatest date to consider, `YYYY-MM-DD` or a full ISO-8601 UTC timestamp.
fromNoEarliest date to consider, `YYYY-MM-DD` or a full ISO-8601 UTC timestamp.
limitNoHow many windows to return at most. Defaults to 8.
review_accessNoDirectory-review test parameter (R20). The documented token switches this listing to the seeded reviewer windows, which are separate from real availability. Omit it for real users.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds genuinely new behavioral facts: UTC-offset formatting, the never-show-bare-time rule, the next-available-window fallback, and the review_access switch to seeded test data. No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is dense but front-loaded with the core behavior, then covers workflow, formatting, edge cases, and test mode. Every sentence carries operational weight, and the timezone example makes the format unambiguous without padding.

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?

With no output schema, the description provides the essential runtime contract: slotId availability, timezone display rules, the empty-result fallback, and the reviewer test-mode switch. An agent has enough to correctly call the tool and interpret what it returns.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a small amount of meaning for review_access (token source and 'do not use for real users') but nothing substantive for from, to, or limit, so it does not rise above baseline.

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?

The first sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'Lists yesmcp's genuinely bookable consultation windows.' It further scopes the tool to 'only real, future, unclaimed slots' and names the dependent sibling (book_consult), so an agent can clearly distinguish it from booking or cancellation tools.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly says 'Use it before book_consult' and explains the slotId handoff, giving clear when-to-use context. It also adds timezone-handling instructions and a reviewer-specific mode, so an agent knows exactly when and how to invoke the tool.

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

All yesmcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly distinct: booking lifecycle (book, cancel, reschedule, availability), services, scenarios, and meta tools each target different actions. The widget/non-widget pairs (book_consult vs booking_widget, get_services vs services_widget) and list_availability vs booking_widget could cause confusion, but the descriptions explicitly state which to prefer and when.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools follow verb_noun (book_consult, cancel_booking, reschedule_booking, get_services, list_availability, advise_scenarios), but four break the pattern with noun_noun or gerund forms (booking_widget, services_widget, directory_census, demo_walkthrough). The mix is readable but inconsistent, especially the widget pairings that differ from their non-widget counterparts.

Tool Count5/5

Ten tools is well-scoped for a consultation and advisory service server. Each tool earns its place: full booking lifecycle, services catalog, scenario playbooks, and reviewer-facing meta tools. No redundant or filler tools.

Completeness4/5

The booking lifecycle is fully covered (list, book, cancel, reschedule) plus interactive widgets, and services/scenario discovery is solid. The only notable gap is that cancel/reschedule require the email confirmation reference — there is no 'list my bookings' tool to look up bookings by email. The demo/census tools are meta but deliberately scoped.

Resources