Hogar Montevideo · Agenda de service técnico

Reclamo en garantía · agendar

agendar_reclamo

Agenda la visita de reclamo en garantía con el mismo técnico del servicio original, en una franja devuelta por consultar_disponibilidad_reclamo. Confirmá antes con el cliente el día, la franja y el problema. Devuelve el número de la nueva orden.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "token_garantia": "<token_garantia>",
      "orden_id": "<orden_id>",
      "fecha": "<fecha>",
      "hora_desde": "<hora_desde>",
      "hora_hasta": "<hora_hasta>",
      "problema": "<problema>",
      "confirmado_por_cliente": "<confirmado_por_cliente>"
    },
    "name": "agendar_reclamo"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`fecha`	Yes	Día elegido (AAAA-MM-DD).
`orden_id`	Yes	orden_id del servicio en garantía (de verificar_codigo_garantia).
`problema`	Yes	Qué sigue fallando o qué pasó después del servicio.
`hora_desde`	Yes	Inicio de la franja elegida (HH:mm).
`hora_hasta`	Yes	Fin de la franja elegida (HH:mm).
`token_garantia`	Yes	token_garantia devuelto por verificar_codigo_garantia.
`confirmado_por_cliente`	Yes	true sólo después de mostrarle al cliente el resumen (día, franja, dirección, datos y condiciones) y que lo haya confirmado explícitamente.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the visit is assigned to the same technician as the original service, the slot must come from the availability tool, and the call returns the new order number, implying each invocation creates a new order (consistent with idempotentHint=false). Error/expiry behavior is not disclosed.

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 sentences, each carrying distinct information: what gets booked, the required pre-call and confirmation, and the return value. No filler, and the core action is front-loaded.

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?

For a 7-parameter write tool with no output schema, the description covers the multi-step flow (availability → client confirmation → booking → new order number), which is what an agent needs to sequence calls correctly. It is slightly thin on failure modes and on what the returned order number should be used for next.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters, including the strict meaning of confirmado_por_cliente. The description adds only the provenance constraint that the day/slot values must come from consultar_disponibilidad_reclamo, which is useful but modest, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb + resource ("Agenda la visita de reclamo en garantía") plus distinguishing attributes: mismo técnico del servicio original and the slot coming from consultar_disponibilidad_reclamo. This clearly separates it from the sibling agendar_servicio, which books a normal service rather than a warranty claim.

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?

It explicitly routes the agent through consultar_disponibilidad_reclamo for the slot and mandates confirming day, slot and problem with the client before booking. That is clear when-to-use and prerequisite guidance, though it never states the negative case (e.g. what to do if the warranty token is invalid or the client has not confirmed).

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

All Hogar Montevideo · Agenda de service técnico tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?