Skip to main content
Glama

request_booking

Submit a pet sitting booking request to a Rover sitter by specifying service type, dates, and pet details. Requires user authentication to proceed.

Instructions

Send a booking request to a sitter. Requires being logged in.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sitterIdYesSitter's Rover username/ID or profile URL
serviceTypeYesType of service to book
startDateYesStart date in YYYY-MM-DD format
endDateYesEnd date in YYYY-MM-DD format
petIdsYesList of pet IDs to include in the booking
messageNoOptional introductory message to the sitter

Implementation Reference

  • The main implementation of the requestBooking method that executes the booking logic. It checks login status, navigates to the sitter's profile, fills in booking details (dates, message), and returns success/failure status.
    async requestBooking(request: BookingRequest): Promise<{ success: boolean; bookingId?: string; message: string }> {
      if (!this.session.isLoggedIn) {
        return { success: false, message: "You must be logged in to request a booking." };
      }
      const page = this.ensurePage();
      const sitterUrl = request.sitterId.startsWith("http")
        ? request.sitterId
        : `${this.BASE_URL}/sitters/${request.sitterId}/`;
    
      await page.goto(sitterUrl);
      await page.waitForLoadState("networkidle");
    
      const requestBtn = page.locator(
        'button:has-text("Request"), a:has-text("Book"), button:has-text("Book")'
      ).first();
      if (await requestBtn.isVisible()) {
        await requestBtn.click();
        await page.waitForLoadState("networkidle");
      }
    
      const startInput = page.locator('input[name*="start"], input[placeholder*="start"]').first();
      if (await startInput.isVisible()) {
        await startInput.fill(request.startDate);
      }
      const endInput = page.locator('input[name*="end"], input[placeholder*="end"]').first();
      if (await endInput.isVisible()) {
        await endInput.fill(request.endDate);
      }
    
      if (request.message) {
        const msgInput = page.locator('textarea[name*="message"], textarea[placeholder*="message"]').first();
        if (await msgInput.isVisible()) {
          await msgInput.fill(request.message);
        }
      }
    
      return {
        success: true,
        message: "Booking request initiated. Please complete on Rover.com.",
      };
    }
  • src/index.ts:104-140 (registration)
    Tool registration defining the 'request_booking' tool with its JSON schema, including sitterId, serviceType, startDate, endDate, petIds, and optional message parameters.
    {
      name: "request_booking",
      description:
        "Send a booking request to a sitter. Requires being logged in.",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          sitterId: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Sitter's Rover username/ID or profile URL",
          },
          serviceType: {
            type: "string",
            enum: ["boarding", "house_sitting", "drop_in", "doggy_day_care", "dog_walking"],
            description: "Type of service to book",
          },
          startDate: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Start date in YYYY-MM-DD format",
          },
          endDate: {
            type: "string",
            description: "End date in YYYY-MM-DD format",
          },
          petIds: {
            type: "array",
            items: { type: "string" },
            description: "List of pet IDs to include in the booking",
          },
          message: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Optional introductory message to the sitter",
          },
        },
        required: ["sitterId", "serviceType", "startDate", "endDate", "petIds"],
      },
    },
  • Zod validation schema (RequestBookingSchema) for runtime type checking of booking request parameters, including enum validation for serviceType.
    const RequestBookingSchema = z.object({
      sitterId: z.string().min(1),
      serviceType: z.enum(["boarding", "house_sitting", "drop_in", "doggy_day_care", "dog_walking"]),
      startDate: z.string().min(1),
      endDate: z.string().min(1),
      petIds: z.array(z.string()),
      message: z.string().optional(),
    });
  • TypeScript interface definition for BookingRequest, defining the shape of the booking request object with required and optional fields.
    export interface BookingRequest {
      sitterId: string;
      serviceType: string;
      startDate: string;
      endDate: string;
      petIds: string[];
      message?: string;
    }
  • The tool handler case statement that validates input using RequestBookingSchema, calls browser.requestBooking(), and formats the response content for the MCP protocol.
    case "request_booking": {
      const params = RequestBookingSchema.parse(args);
      const result = await browser.requestBooking(params);
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: result.success
              ? `Booking request sent! ${result.message}${result.bookingId ? ` Booking ID: ${result.bookingId}` : ""}`
              : `Failed to send booking request: ${result.message}`,
          },
        ],
      };
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions an authentication requirement ('Requires being logged in'), which is useful, but fails to describe other critical behaviors such as whether this is a read-only or destructive operation, what happens upon sending (e.g., confirmation, error handling), or any rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely performs a write action.

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?

The description is extremely concise with just one sentence that efficiently states the purpose and a key requirement. It is front-loaded with the main action and wastes no words, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the complexity of a booking request tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., mutation effects, response format), does not explain return values or errors, and provides minimal usage context. This leaves the agent with inadequate information to handle the tool effectively in real-world scenarios.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, meaning all parameters are documented in the input schema. The description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it doesn't explain parameter interactions or usage nuances). According to the rules, with high schema coverage, the baseline score is 3, as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('Send a booking request') and target ('to a sitter'), which distinguishes it from siblings like 'message_sitter' or 'search_sitters'. However, it doesn't specify what constitutes a 'booking request' versus other interactions, leaving some ambiguity about the exact outcome.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description includes a prerequisite ('Requires being logged in'), which provides basic context for usage. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'message_sitter' or 'search_services', and does not mention any exclusions or specific scenarios for its application.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/markswendsen-code/mcp-rover'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server