Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Arrumou Neural

by io.github.brunoreisportela
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Bloquear datas

block_dates
Destructive

Cria um bloqueio manual de datas em uma habitação (impede novas reservas). Exige aprovação do usuário; falha se houver reserva ativa no período.

Escopo: calendar:write · Risco: consequential (prévia + aprovação do usuário obrigatória) · Efeitos: Cria RoomBlock MANUAL e registra atividade. Não altera o Airbnb. · INDISPONÍVEL nesta autorização (escopo não concedido ou papel sem o módulo)

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": {
      "habitation_id": "<habitation_id>",
      "start_date": "<start_date>",
      "end_date": "<end_date>"
    },
    "name": "block_dates"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reasonNo
end_dateYesFim exclusivo.
start_dateYes
approval_idNoId de uma aprovação já decidida pelo usuário para esta mesma ação. Omita para receber a prévia e o link de aprovação.
habitation_idYes
idempotency_keyNoChave de idempotência escolhida pelo cliente; repetir a chave com os mesmos dados devolve o mesmo resultado.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: discloses the approval prerequisite, the active-reservation failure case, the concrete side effects (creates a RoomBlock MANUAL and writes an activity log entry), the boundary that Airbnb is not modified, and an availability caveat stating the tool is not usable under the current authorization. This is exactly the context the destructiveHint/idempotentHint flags cannot convey.

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?

Front-loads the core action and effect, then separates scope/risk/effects/availability into a scannable structure with no filler. Slightly dense with internal jargon (RoomBlock MANUAL, calendar:write) but each clause carries operational meaning.

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?

For a 6-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema and no annotation coverage of the approval workflow, the description supplies everything an agent needs: prerequisites, failure mode, side effects, external-system boundary, and current unavailability. Nothing essential is missing.

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 coverage is only 50%, and the description does not explain individual parameters such as habitation_id, start_date, or the 'Fim exclusivo' boundary of end_date; those details live in the schema. It only implicitly ties approval_id to the approval flow. Baseline 3 is right since the description neither fully compensates nor ignores the parameters entirely.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Cria um bloqueio manual de datas em uma habitação') plus the immediate effect ('impede novas reservas'), which distinguishes it cleanly from siblings like remove_block, list_blocks and create_reservation. The agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

Gives concrete usage conditions: mandatory user approval, and an explicit failure condition ('falha se houver reserva ativa no período'). It also explains the preview/approval_id flow. It stops short of naming alternatives (e.g., remove_block for undoing, list_blocks for inspection), so it is clear but not fully routing.

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

All Arrumou Neural toolsInspect
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