Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Arrumou Neural

by io.github.brunoreisportela
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Vincular anúncio do Airbnb

set_airbnb_link
Destructive

Define (ou remove) o link canônico do anúncio Airbnb de uma habitação. Necessário antes da sincronização pela extensão. Exige aprovação do usuário.

Escopo: properties:write · Risco: consequential (prévia + aprovação do usuário obrigatória) · Efeitos: Atualiza o vínculo, zera a cobertura sincronizada anterior e espelha o link no catálogo Arrumou. · 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>",
      "airbnb_url": "<airbnb_url>"
    },
    "name": "set_airbnb_link"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesId da habitação.
airbnb_urlYesURL https://www.airbnb.../rooms/<id> ou null para remover o vínculo.
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

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the concrete effects: the link is updated, the previously synced coverage is zeroed, and the link is mirrored into the Arrumou catalog, plus the consequential-risk approval flow and required scope. This is exactly the destructive-behavior detail an agent needs, since destructiveHint alone only flags risk without saying what is lost.

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-loaded with the action, then a structured Escopo/Risco/Efeitos line that scans quickly. Slight redundancy between 'Exige aprovação do usuário' and 'prévia + aprovação do usuário obrigatória', but no wasted sentences.

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 destructive, approval-gated mutation with no output schema, the description covers prerequisite ordering, effects, risk tier, scope, approval mechanics (omit approval_id to get the preview link), and current unavailability. Nothing needed to call it correctly 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 100% and every parameter already carries a description, including the null-to-remove semantics and the approval_id preview behavior. The prose repeats the removal case but adds no syntax or constraints beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb (define/remove) plus resource (canonical Airbnb listing link of a property) with scope clearly bounded to one property. Nothing in the sibling list shares this purpose, and the parenthetical '(ou remove)' pre-empts ambiguity about null semantics.

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?

Explicitly states the precondition ('Necessário antes da sincronização pela extensão'), the approval requirement, and even the current availability state ('INDISPONÍVEL nesta autorização'). An agent knows both when to call it and when calling it will fail.

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