wallet_overviewFetch the salon's payment balance and financial overview from Booksy Biz's payments center; optionally bypass the local cache for current data.
Balance and overview from the payments financial center.
| 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 open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — notably it never mentions the caching behavior implied by the sole parameter, nor freshness, currency scope, or what the "overview" aggregates.
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 short sentence with no filler, front-loaded on the resource. It is efficient but leans toward under-specification rather than genuine brevity.
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?
There is no output schema, so the description should indicate what the overview returns (available vs. pending balance, currencies, payout totals). It instead offers only a vague phrase, leaving the agent unable to predict the payload before calling.
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 description coverage is 100% and the single parameter is fully documented ("Skip the local cache"), so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no context on when to pass fresh=true (e.g., after a transaction) versus accepting cached figures.
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?
"Balance and overview from the payments financial center" names a resource (wallet balance/overview) but the verb is nominal and the scope is fuzzy. It does not distinguish this from payment_summary, wallet_payouts, or checkout_transactions, so an agent cannot tell which sibling to pick without guessing.
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?
The description gives no when-to-use condition and names no alternative. With ~15 payment-related siblings (payment_summary, wallet_payouts, payment_rows, cash_registers), the absence of routing guidance is a real gap.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.