Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

opentable_search

Search OpenTable restaurants by cuisine, name, or neighborhood near coordinates, and view live availability for a chosen date, time, and party size.

Instructions

Search OpenTable restaurants near a location. Searches restaurants by free-text term (cuisine, name, neighborhood) near a latitude/longitude, for a given date/time and party size, including inline live availability per result.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sizeNoMax results, default 10
termYesFree-text search term
latitudeYesSearch center latitude
date_timeNoReservation date/time, RFC3339-minute local format; defaults to now
longitudeYesSearch center longitude
party_sizeNoParty size, default 2

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it usefully discloses that results include inline live availability, which is a real behavioral trait. However it says nothing about auth needs, rate limits, or result pagination/ordering, so coverage is partial.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action. The first sentence is slightly redundant with the second ('Search OpenTable restaurants near a location' vs 'Searches restaurants by ... near a latitude/longitude'), a minor cost.

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 six-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description covers the search intent, required location input, and the availability payload adequately. It omits result-count/pagination behavior, which the size parameter only partially addresses.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that the free-text term maps to cuisine, name, or neighborhood, and framing date_time/party_size as reservation parameters.

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?

States a specific verb (search) and resource (OpenTable restaurants) plus scope (near a lat/long, with date/time and party size), and notes inline live availability. It implicitly separates itself from opentable_restaurant/menus/reviews, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies when the tool applies (finding restaurants by free-text term near a coordinate with reservation context) but gives no explicit when-not guidance and names no alternative tool for cases where the agent might instead want a detail, menu, or review endpoint.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools