get_booking_url
Get the public human-facing booking URLs for Raze.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Raze
TDQS
A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the action without mentioning rate limits, authentication needs, or what 'Raze' refers to.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence with no wasted words, front-loading the purpose effectively.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no output schema and no annotations, the description should ideally explain the format or count of returned URLs. It is minimal but adequate for a simple retrieval tool.
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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description adds meaning by specifying the output (booking URLs) and context (for Raze). A baseline of 4 applies since no parameter details are needed.
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?
The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the specific resource 'public human-facing booking URLs for Raze', distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_booking or get_available_slots.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_booking_profile or get_available_slots), nor any context on prerequisites or exclusion criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct aspect of Raze's public information or booking functionality. There is no overlap; booking, pricing, projects, resources, and services are clearly separated.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., create_booking, get_available_slots, list_projects). This makes it easy for an agent to predict tool behavior.
Tool Count5/5
With 10 tools, the server covers the main public-facing aspects of Raze (booking, pricing, projects, resources, services) without being overly heavy or thin. Each tool serves a clear purpose.
Completeness5/5
The tool set provides comprehensive coverage for a company site: booking lifecycle (including slot checking and creation), pricing, project case studies (list and detail), resources, and services. No obvious gaps for the intended public interaction.