MCP Cliniko Server

list_appointments

Retrieve or search for healthcare appointments in Cliniko by filtering patient, practitioner, date, status, or business criteria.

Instructions

List or search for appointments

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_appointments"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`patient_id`	No	Filter by patient ID
`practitioner_id`	No	Filter by practitioner ID
`business_id`	No	Filter by business ID
`starts_at`	No	Filter appointments starting from (ISO 8601)
`ends_at`	No	Filter appointments ending before (ISO 8601)
`status`	No	Filter by status (Active, Cancelled, Did not arrive)
`page`	No	Page number
`per_page`	No	Results per page (max 100)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Apr 15, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'list or search,' omitting key traits like read-only nature, pagination behavior, sorting, or rate limits. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the name.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is minimal and front-loaded, but it is arguably too short. It gets the point across but lacks structure or additional helpful details, failing to earn its place fully.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, pagination behavior, or how to perform a broad list vs. filtered search. The schema covers parameters, but overall context is lacking.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description doesn't need to add much. It reiterates 'list or search,' which implies parameter combinations (filtered search vs. unfiltered list), but this is a minor semantic addition beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the verb (list/search) and resource (appointments), distinguishing it from siblings like get_appointment (single) or cancel_appointment. However, it lacks specificity about the scope of listings (e.g., all appointments or filtered) and could be more precise.

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 on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like get_appointment or other list tools. Missing explicit context for when to use list vs search, or when not to use it.

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