Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

easytable-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

easytable_modify_booking

Destructive

Modify an existing restaurant booking by replacing its date, time, party size, and details. Requires the booking ID from find bookings tool and user confirmation before applying changes.

Instructions

Modify an existing booking (date/time/party size/details). Like create, it reads the Turnstile token from your signed-in widget tab. Get the existing booking id from easytable_find_bookings. The change replaces the whole booking: email, comment and company are required — pass the booking's current values to keep them (ask the user if unknown), or '' to clear them; the newsletter opt-in is reset. Asks the user to confirm first: a confirmation prompt where the client supports one; otherwise the first call returns a preview and a confirmToken, and only a repeat call with that token proceeds (see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE). The first call makes NO network call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesRestaurant id — the `id` in a book.easytable.com/book/?id=<id> link.
dateYesBooking date, ISO YYYY-MM-DD (from easytable_list_dates).
langNoWidget language code (en, se, da, …). Defaults to en.en
nameYesGuest name on the booking.
timeYesTime slot HH:MM (from easytable_list_times).
typeYesBooking area/type id from easytable_list_types.
emailYesGuest email. REQUIRED — the booking's current email, or '' to remove it (also drops the confirmation mail).
eventNoOptional event id.
mobileYesGuest mobile in E.164 (e.g. +46701234567).
commentYesFree-text note / special requests. REQUIRED — the booking's current comment (e.g. allergy notes), or '' to remove it.
companyYesCompany name. REQUIRED — the booking's current company, or '' for none.
personsYesParty size.
existingYesId of the existing booking to modify (from easytable_find_bookings).
confirmTokenNoONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 "confirmation-required" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / confirm
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Must be true to proceed. Without this, the tool returns a preview.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmToken
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 \"confirmation-required\" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed8 schema fields changedv1.1.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / comment / description
      Previous value: -"Free-text note / special requests."New value: +"Free-text note / special requests. REQUIRED — the booking's current comment (e.g. allergy notes), or '' to remove it."
    • changedInput schema / properties / company / description
      Previous value: -"Optional company name."New value: +"Company name. REQUIRED — the booking's current company, or '' for none."
    • addedInput schema / properties / email / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "format": "email",
+    "pattern": "^(?:[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]+\\.)*[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]*[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@(?:[A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "const": "",
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / email / description
      Previous value: -"Guest email."New value: +"Guest email. REQUIRED — the booking's current email, or '' to remove it (also drops the confirmation mail)."
    • removedInput schema / properties / email / format
      Removed value: -"email"
    • removedInput schema / properties / email / pattern
      Removed value: -"^(?:[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]+\\.)*[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]*[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@(?:[A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$"
    • removedInput schema / properties / email / type
      Removed value: -"string"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "id",
-  "type",
-  "date",
-  "time",
-  "persons",
-  "name",
-  "mobile",
-  "existing"
-]New value: +[
+  "id",
+  "type",
+  "date",
+  "time",
+  "persons",
+  "name",
+  "mobile",
+  "email",
+  "comment",
+  "company",
+  "existing"
+]
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  4. Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / email / pattern
      Previous value: -"^(?!\\.)(?!.*\\.\\.)([A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-\\.]*)[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@([A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$"New value: +"^(?:[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]+\\.)*[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]*[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@(?:[A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$"
  5. First observedv0.0.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only cover the destructive/idempotent/write profile; the description adds substantial behavior beyond them — whole-booking replacement semantics, required-field retention rules, that '' clears a field, that a blank email drops the confirmation mail, that the newsletter opt-in resets, and that phase 1 makes no network call. This is exactly the extra context a mutation tool needs.

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?

Front-loads what the tool does, then the id source, then the replace semantics, then the confirmation flow. It is long and parenthetically dense, but nearly every clause carries operational information rather than filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 14-parameter, 11-required destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the auth/token path, the id source, the full-replace hazard, and the two-phase confirmation return contract (preview + confirmToken), so an agent can complete a correct call sequence.

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 the schema already documents each field; the description nonetheless adds cross-parameter meaning the schema cannot convey — that email/comment/company are required in full-replace mode and must carry current values, and that confirmToken is a phase-2-only argument tied to a preview. Above the 3 baseline for genuine added semantics.

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?

Opens with a precise verb+resource ('Modify an existing booking') and enumerates the mutable scope (date/time/party size/details), which cleanly separates it from easytable_create_booking and easytable_cancel_booking. An agent can identify the tool without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly routes the agent to easytable_find_bookings for the booking id, states that create-like Turnstile token handling applies, and spells out the when/when-not rules for confirmToken ('never on the first call, never invented, never reused', ignored when elicitation exists). Nothing is left to inference.

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