Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Arrumou Neural

by io.github.brunoreisportela
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Alterar datas

change_reservation_dates
Destructive

Altera entrada/saída de uma estadia, recalculando diárias conforme a tarifa. Recusa se a habitação estiver ocupada. Exige aprovação.

Escopo: reservations:write · Risco: consequential (prévia + aprovação do usuário obrigatória) · Efeitos: Atualiza datas e lançamentos de diárias. · 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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "check_in": "<check_in>",
      "check_out": "<check_out>"
    },
    "name": "change_reservation_dates"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
check_inYes
check_outYes
approval_idNoId de uma aprovação já decidida pelo usuário para esta mesma ação. Omita para receber a prévia e o link de aprovação.
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

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds real value: rate recalculation, ledger updates for daily rates, the occupancy refusal rule, and the mandatory preview-and-approval flow. Only the return payload and error/refusal details remain unspecified.

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?

The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by preconditions and a compact metadata line (scope, risk, effects, availability). The availability clause is environment-specific noise but is short and clearly separated.

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 destructive 5-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers side effects, preconditions, approval workflow and risk level. Missing are refusal/error outcomes and confirmation of what the result contains after approval.

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 40%: approval_id and idempotency_key are documented in the schema, while id, check_in and check_out carry only patterns. The description implies the approval parameter ('Exige aprovação') and the date semantics, but says nothing about the ISO date format or what id refers to, so it only partially compensates.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: it changes a stay's check-in/check-out and recalculates the nightly rates according to the rate plan. This is clearly distinct from siblings like change_reservation_room or update_reservation_status, though no sibling is 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 Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete preconditions: it refuses when the unit is occupied and requires user approval (preview + approval link via approval_id), plus a scope/risk line marking it consequential. It also warns the tool is unavailable under the current authorization. It does not point to alternative tools when the operation is refused or unavailable.

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