service_menuFetches salon service categories with services, variants, prices, and durations; set fresh=true to bypass the local cache when you need current data.
All service categories with services, variants, prices and durations.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| fresh | No | Skip the local cache |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully discloses the return shape (a nested catalog rather than a flat list), but omits the one behavioral trait unique to this tool — the local cache that the `fresh` parameter bypasses — and says nothing about the size or cost of a full-catalog fetch.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single tight sentence with zero filler, front-loading the resource and its contents. It is a noun fragment rather than a complete statement of action, which costs it the top score.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With one optional parameter and no output schema, the description does the important work of sketching the returned structure, which is genuinely useful. But for an openWorld catalog read it omits scope (whose menu — the current business?), and the caching/`fresh` behavior an agent must understand before calling it repeatedly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and the single `fresh` parameter is documented in-schema as 'Skip the local cache'. The description adds nothing about it, so baseline 3 applies; it neither compensates nor detracts.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description enumerates the resource and its payload precisely (categories, services, variants, prices, durations), which tells an agent this is a full-catalog read rather than a single-record lookup like service_details or service_addons. It lacks an explicit verb and never names a sibling, so differentiation is inferential rather than stated.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance on when to call this versus service_details, service_addons, or business_features. The agent must infer from the name that this returns the whole menu rather than one service.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.