AestheticsPro by Cotlet

View appointment calendar in AestheticsPro

aestheticspro_view_appointment_calendar

Read-onlyIdempotent

View appointment 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_view_appointment_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

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: the call performs no UI action, returns procedural guidance (screens, buttons, fields), and requires a separate browser tool to actually execute — that is real context beyond 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.

Conciseness3/5

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

The core behavior is front-loaded and clear, but the closing paragraph about AestheticsPro's Enterprise-only 'Custom API solutions' and the absence of public API docs is long, dated ('checked 11 Nov 2026'), and only indirectly relevant to invoking this tool. The 'from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent' phrasing is filler that does not help an agent decide or act.

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?

With no input parameters and no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining the return value, and it does so ('Returns how to do it in AestheticsPro step by step (screens, buttons, fields)'). Combined with the browser-tool handoff, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only the sibling-selection guidance is missing.

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 there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline is 4. No misleading parameter claims are made.

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 ('View appointment calendar in the user's own AestheticsPro account') and, crucially, clarifies that the tool returns step-by-step instructions rather than the calendar data itself. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as aestheticspro_view_outreach_calendar or aestheticspro_view_appointment_history, so sibling differentiation is left implicit.

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 gives a clear follow-on action ('then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's AestheticsPro Cloud Browser') and states that the tool opens nothing by itself, which is useful routing. However, it never says when an agent should pick this over the other calendar-viewing siblings, nor any prerequisites or exclusions beyond the browser handoff.

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?