AestheticsPro by Cotlet

Create room calendar in AestheticsPro

aestheticspro_create_room_calendar

Read-onlyIdempotent

Create room calendar in the user's own AestheticsPro account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in AestheticsPro step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's AestheticsPro Cloud Browser. AestheticsPro's official API: AestheticsPro offers "Custom API solutions" only as custom work on its $350 a month Enterprise plan, arranged with AestheticsPro, and publishes no public API documentation or self-serve API key page (checked 11 Nov 2026).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "aestheticspro_create_room_calendar"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful context beyond them: it returns screens/buttons/fields guidance and 'opens nothing by itself', which reconciles the 'create' name with the read-only annotation. However, it does not state prerequisites such as whether an authenticated Cloud Browser session is required, nor anything about the response shape or failure modes.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The core two-part workflow (returns instructions; execute via browser tools) is front-loaded and clear, but the trailing paragraph about Enterprise pricing at $350/month and the 'checked 11 Nov 2026' date is tangential detail that pads the definition. It justifies why browser automation is used, but could be stated far more briefly.

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 zero-parameter, non-mutating guidance tool with no output schema, the description covers what it returns, that it has no side effects, and how to complete the task afterward. The main remaining gap is not naming any prerequisite about the Cloud Browser session state.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no input is needed, since it only returns instructions rather than acting on any identified room or calendar.

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 states a specific verb and resource (create a room calendar in the user's AestheticsPro account) and immediately clarifies the surprising part: it returns step-by-step instructions rather than performing the action. It does not differentiate itself from the closely named sibling aestheticspro_create_staff_calendar, so an agent must infer the room-vs-staff distinction from the names alone.

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 gives a clear usage contract: this tool produces the how-to, then the actual creation is done with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the AestheticsPro Cloud Browser. That is real when/how guidance, but there are no explicit exclusions or comparisons against sibling calendar-creation tools.

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

All AestheticsPro by Cotlet 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?