SyncroMSP MCP Server

appointments_create_type

Create a new appointment type by providing a name and required location type (integer, 0 for customer). Optionally add email instructions and hardcoded location.

Instructions

Create a new appointment type. Note: location_type is REQUIRED (API returns 422 without it). Integer value where 0 = 'customer'.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "appointments_create_type"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Type name (required)
`location_type`	No	Location type (REQUIRED, integer, 0 = 'customer')
`email_instructions`	No	Instructions sent in email
`location_hard_code`	No	Hardcoded location

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1May 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It reveals that location_type is actually required (contradicting schema) and defines the integer mapping, but does not explain side effects (creates a new type), errors, permissions, or idempotency.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Extremely concise: two sentences without wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second provides critical parameter nuance.

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?

Lacks return value information (likely the created type object) and no explanation of other parameters (email_instructions, location_hard_code) beyond their schema descriptions. Insufficient for a creation tool without output schema.

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% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds emphasis by restating location_type as REQUIRED and defining the integer mapping (0='customer'), but this contradicts the schema's required list, creating confusion.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Create a new appointment type') and resource ('appointment type'), distinguishing it from siblings like appointments_create (which creates an appointment instance) and appointments_update_type.

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 versus alternatives such as appointments_update_type or appointments_delete_type. It only provides a critical usage note about location_type being required, but fails to contextualize relative to other type-related tools.

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

Deploy Server