It’s a good play on words from a British English perspective:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/to%20let

From an American perspective who is familiar with that usage, it's not that great. And it really doesn't do justice to the actuality of the situation. "Lets" means "permits" or "allows", but this is an obligatory deal here.

I, too, am intrigued; what bothers you about "lets"?!

It makes it sound optional.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I don't know, I have no good reason it just annoys me. Alternatives that would annoy me less: This Scottish AirBnB comes with a job at a bookstore, or, An AirBnB in Scotland includes running a local bookstore, or, Take a working vacation at this bookstore AirBnB.

I'm with u dude, it's extremely odd phrasing to say that the airbnb "LETS" you run the bookstore when the article makes clear that running the bookstore is a requirement of staying at the airbnb. There's no option described that involves NOT running the bookstore so it seems like an extremely poorly phrased title.

I think it's meant to be parsed more as conveying the sense of opportunity rather than choice. As in "this luxury car lets you experience a comfortable ride."

It doesn't bother me because clearly that is the point of signing up for the accommodations! The whole idea is they allow you to do it if you pay the fee.

I know, you're thinking McDonald's doesn't "let" you eat a burger if you pay for it.

But a burger is a commodity, and easy to get and McDonald's isn't taking a risk letting you into their place.

This person is absolutely dying to run a bookstore for a short time and he gets the opportunity.

Doesn't bother me, but I'm not American. What bothers you about it?