Ceki

book-event

Schedule a time slot with a specialist. Automatically holds crypto escrow for the pending event.

Instructions

Book a time slot with a specialist. Creates a pending event with crypto escrow held automatically.

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": {
      "kal_schedule_id": "<kal_schedule_id>"
    },
    "name": "book-event"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`end`	No	End time (HH:MM)
`date`	No	Booking date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`start`	No	Start time (HH:MM)
`description`	No	Booking description / notes
`kal_schedule_id`	Yes	Schedule ID to book (from search-specialists results)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description correctly reveals the mutation (creates a pending event) and mentions automatic crypto escrow. However, it omits side effects, success/failure details, 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

Two sentences, no fluff. Could be improved with structured details, but it's concise and direct.

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?

No output schema, so the description should explain return values or what the agent receives. It does not. Error handling and next steps are missing, making it incomplete for a 5-parameter tool.

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 adds minimal value beyond parameter names and types. The mention of 'crypto escrow' is not parameter-specific. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action (book), the resource (time slot with a specialist), and adds context about crypto escrow. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like 'search-specialists' or 'get-schedules'.

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 vs alternatives. Prerequisites like obtaining a kal_schedule_id from search-specialists are not mentioned, and there is no hint of when not to use this tool.

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