MCP Cliniko Server

get_available_times

Retrieve available appointment slots for a healthcare practitioner within specified date ranges to schedule patient visits.

Instructions

Get available appointment times for a practitioner

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": {
      "business_id": "<business_id>",
      "practitioner_id": "<practitioner_id>",
      "from": "<from>",
      "to": "<to>"
    },
    "name": "get_available_times"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`business_id`	Yes	Business ID
`practitioner_id`	Yes	Practitioner ID
`from`	Yes	Start date for availability check (YYYY-MM-DD)
`to`	Yes	End date for availability check (YYYY-MM-DD)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Apr 15, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses no behavioral traits such as side effects (none expected from a 'get' operation), return format, or any constraints. The single sentence provides minimal behavioral context.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core action and resource, appropriate for this simple tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the 4 required parameters, no output schema, and numerous sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the output represents (e.g., list of time slots) or how to interpret results, limiting its standalone usefulness.

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?

The input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so the foundation is adequate. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides; thus, it meets the baseline without extra value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('available appointment times'), which is clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_appointments' that also deal with appointments, leaving some ambiguity about the distinct purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'list_appointments' for existing appointments, 'create_appointment' after finding times). There are no prerequisites or context cues for usage.

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