get_booking_pageLook up a public Yoya booking page. Pass its slug (the part after yoya.ai/) or the whole link — either works. Returns the host name, meeting title/description, meeting length, the meeting options offered (google_meet / zoom / in_person), and any fields the guest must provide to book. Returns null if no active page matches.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the null-on-no-active-page behavior, the 'public' and 'active' preconditions, and lists the returned fields. It doesn't state read-only status, but 'look up' reasonably implies it.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences, no filler. The action comes first, followed by input guidance, then the output summary. Every sentence earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description fully covers how to call it, what to pass, what it returns, and the null edge case. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema only defines 'slug' as a string with minLength 1. The description enriches this by defining a slug as 'the part after yoya.ai/' and stating that the whole link is also accepted — meaning the schema alone would not convey how to invoke the tool correctly.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly identifies the action ('look up') and the resource ('public Yoya booking page'), and enumerates the returned data. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'get_booking', but the consistent use of 'page' makes the object distinct enough.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It provides practical input guidance ('Pass its slug... or the whole link — either works') and implies the tool is for retrieving public booking-page details. However, it never addresses when to prefer this over siblings like get_booking or book_meeting, and gives no exclusion conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct action and resource: book a meeting, fetch a booking, inspect a booking page, and list available slots. There is no overlap, and the intended use of each tool is immediately clear.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: book_meeting, get_booking, get_booking_page, list_available_times. The verbs and nouns clearly indicate the operation and target.
Four tools cover the complete guest-side booking flow without unnecessary redundancy. This is a well-scoped size for a focused booking server.
The set covers the essential guest journey: view page, check availability, book, and retrieve booking status. A direct cancel or reschedule tool is missing, though the booking result provides a manage link, making this a minor gap rather than a dead end.