meetergo-mcp

reschedule_appointment

Move an appointment to a new start time while keeping the same duration. Optionally bypass availability checks.

Instructions

Move an appointment to a new start time (duration unchanged).

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": {
      "appointment_id": "<appointment_id>",
      "start": "<start>"
    },
    "name": "reschedule_appointment"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`start`	Yes
`appointment_id`	Yes
`ignore_availability`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Jul 8, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that duration is unchanged, but fails to mention that it modifies the existing appointment (destructive), whether availability is checked, or the effect on other attendees. The parameter 'ignore_availability' hints at behavior but is unexplained.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no redundancy. However, it is so terse that it omits critical details expected for a tool with multiple parameters, making it borderline under-specified rather than concisely complete.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description only covers the core action and duration preservation, leaving out parameter semantics, return value, prerequisites, and potential side effects. This is insufficient for reliable agent decision-making.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, with no explanation of the three parameters (appointment_id, start, ignore_availability) in the description. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema fields' titles and types, leaving the agent unable to understand what each parameter does.

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 verb 'Move' and the resource 'appointment', and specifies that the duration remains unchanged. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'cancel_appointment' (cancel) and 'create_booking' (create). It is specific and unambiguous.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to reschedule vs cancel or create. There are no prerequisites or contextual notes about availability or conflicts.

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