Skip to main content
Glama

Vila Buarque

by io.github.junoventures

get_availability

Get available time slots for a bookable service on a given date (Wix Bookings). Pass the serviceId from list_booking_services and a date in YYYY-MM-DD. Pass the same place_slug you used there — slot times are returned in the VENUE's timezone, which is not necessarily the directory's.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYesDate in YYYY-MM-DD format (e.g. "2026-06-25").
serviceIdYesService ID from list_booking_services.
place_slugNoVenue place slug — use the same one passed to list_booking_services.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a critical behavioral detail: slot times are returned in the VENUE's timezone, not necessarily the directory's. The verb 'Get' implies read-only, but it does not explicitly mention side effects or authentication needs.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: the first states purpose, the second gives parameter dependencies and format, the third warns about timezone. Front-loaded and free of fluff.

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?

Covers purpose, parameter origins, and a key timezone gotcha. No output schema exists, but 'available time slots' implies the return shape. It lacks explicit description of the response structure or error behavior, but for a simple read-only tool it is sufficiently complete.

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%, but the description adds valuable meaning beyond the schema: it explains that serviceId comes from list_booking_services, reinforces using the same place_slug as passed there, and highlights the timezone implication. This goes beyond simple restatement.

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 uses a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Get available time slots for a bookable service on a given date.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like create_booking or list_booking_services.

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?

Implies a clear workflow: first call list_booking_services to obtain serviceId, then pass the same place_slug used there. This connects to sibling tools and sets context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives.

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

All Vila Buarque toolsInspect
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 targets a distinct resource or action: booking services, restaurant reservations, event tickets, and RSVPs are all clearly separated by domain and described with explicit use cases. Similarly, search_places, search_dishes, and get_restaurant_menus cover different granularities of place/menu lookup. The descriptions include guidance on when to use each tool, eliminating ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., list_*, get_*, create_*, search_*). While a few verbs like 'request' and 'rsvp' differ, they accurately reflect the action's semantics and do not break the overall consistency. The naming makes the tool's purpose predictable from its name.

Tool Count4/5

At 28 tools, this is a large set, but it serves a broad multi-domain directory (places, events, movies, store, bookings, content, etc.). Each tool covers a distinct feature or resource, and there are no redundant tools. The count is at the upper boundary but appropriate for the server's comprehensive scope.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle for the directory's main domains: search/discover places, view details, menus, reviews, book services, reserve/RSVP events, browse movies/showtimes, list products, access content (blog, guides, FAQs), submit forms, and check loyalty. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations for the stated purpose. The inclusion of pairing tools like list_forms→submit_form and get_availability→create_booking shows deliberate workflow completeness.

Resources