Centro

request_reservation

Request a table at a restaurant. THE RESTAURANT IS NOT NOTIFIED YET: the request is held and a confirmation email is sent to the address you provide, and only when that person clicks the link does the restaurant receive it. Tell the user to check their inbox — the link expires in 24 hours. Use a real address belonging to the person you are acting for; the confirmation link is deliberately not returned to you. This is a request, not a confirmed booking: the restaurant confirms out of band.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Name the table is under.
`email`	Yes	The guest's own email — the confirmation link is sent here.
`phone`	No	Optional phone number for the restaurant to reach the guest.
`message`	No	Optional note (occasion, dietary needs, seating preference).
`partySize`	Yes	Number of people (1–30).
`place_slug`	Yes	Restaurant place slug from search_places.
`requestedAt`	Yes	Desired date and time as an ISO instant. Must be in the future.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully bears the burden of disclosing behavior. It reveals the deferral mechanism, email confirmation link, 24-hour expiration, and out-of-band restaurant confirmation, leaving no hidden surprises.

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 extremely concise: three sentences that front-load the purpose and immediately follow with critical caveats in all-caps emphasis. Every sentence adds essential information with no waste.

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?

Given no output schema, the description fully explains the expected outcome (email sent, no immediate notification) and what the user should do. It covers all important behavioral aspects for a tool with complex deferred side effects.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by emphasizing that the email must be the guest's own address and that the confirmation link is sent there, clarifying a critical constraint beyond the schema.

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 tool requests a table and explicitly distinguishes it from a confirmed booking, using the sibling 'create_booking' for comparison. The verb 'request' and resource 'reservation' are specific.

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?

The description provides explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: it explains that the restaurant is not notified immediately and instructs the user to check their inbox. It implies that for immediate confirmation, 'create_booking' should be used.

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

All Centro tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose. Tools like create_booking and request_reservation target different services (appointments vs. restaurant tables), and reserve_event_tickets vs. rsvp_event differentiate paid holds from free RSVPs. No overlapping functionality that would confuse an agent.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., create_booking, list_events, search_dishes) using lowercase with underscores. No mixing of conventions or irregular verbs.

Tool Count4/5

28 tools cover a broad domain of neighborhood directory services (bookings, events, movies, restaurant menus, forms, etc.). While the count is slightly high, each tool serves a specific function and is justified by the domain scope.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides comprehensive coverage for a neighborhood directory: search, booking, reservations, event management, menus, reviews, forms, loyalty, and more. No obvious gaps; all core user needs are addressed.

Resources

Need Help?