[Requires API key with the matching scope] List reservations of the API key tenant. Requires the reservations:read scope. Optional filters: resource_id, from/to (YYYY-MM-DD), status, limit (1-200, default 50).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| to | No | End date filter YYYY-MM-DD. | |
| from | No | Start date filter YYYY-MM-DD. | |
| limit | No | 1-200, default 50. | |
| status | No | Filter by status (e.g. confirmed, pending, cancelled). | |
| resource_id | No | Filter by resource UUID. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses scope requirement and filter options, but misses pagination behavior (e.g., how to get next page) and response format.
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?
Two sentences with essential information front-loaded (scope requirement), no wasted words.
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?
No output schema, so description should explain response structure minimally. Missing info on return fields, error handling, or pagination. Adequate for a simple list tool but incomplete.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description repeats parameter info and adds date format hint and default limit, but adds little beyond schema.
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?
Description clearly states it lists reservations for the API key tenant, with specific verb 'List' and resource 'reservations'. It distinguishes from siblings like get_reservation (singular) and create_reservation.
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?
Explicitly requires API key with matching scope and reservations:read scope. Lists optional filters, but doesn't provide guidance on when to use this vs. check_availability or other siblings.
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.