list_servicesRetrieve all bookable services with their duration, price, and assigned staff to plan appointments and check availability.
All bookable services with id, duration in minutes, price in USD, and which staff perform them.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description aligns with them. It adds meaningful context beyond the annotations by specifying that the response includes id, duration in minutes, price in USD, and performing staff, and by qualifying the scope as 'bookable' services.
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?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes either the operation's scope or the content of the result.
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?
With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining the return value, and it does list the key fields. It is sufficient for a simple parameterless listing tool, though it leaves minor details like response structure or staff representation unspecified.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, so the description needs no parameter-level explanation. The baseline of 4 applies; the description is entirely appropriate for a parameterless list operation.
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?
The description clearly states a list/read operation over a specific resource (services) and enumerates the returned fields (id, duration, price, staff). This distinctively separates it from sibling tools that operate on customers, bookings, availability, or revenue.
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?
Usage context is implied by the resource itself: this is the obvious tool for retrieving the catalog of bookable services. However, there is no explicit statement of when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor any exclusions or conditions, though the disjoint sibling set makes confusion unlikely.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.