SnowSure — Snow & Ski

Find lodging & booking link

book_lodging

Idempotent

Lodging near a resort via LUXSKI for the signed-in user. With a specific hotelName + checkIn + checkOut it PREBOOKS a live rate and returns a LUXSKI checkout URL to complete payment (we hold the rate + attribute the booking; we never charge). Without those it returns availability + a booking link. Requires a SnowSure user access token (OAuth). Payment always completes on LUXSKI.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`slug`	Yes	Resort slug to find lodging near, e.g. verbier
`guests`	No	Number of adults, optional
`checkIn`	No	Check-in date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`checkOut`	No	Check-out date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`hotelName`	No	Specific hotel to prebook (from find_powder_trips / search). With dates → returns a checkout URL.
`powderEventId`	No	Optional powder-event id to attribute the booking to

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`markdown`	No	Human-readable markdown summary of the tool result (may be omitted when structuredContent carries a typed payload; content[0].text always has the prose).

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Despite annotations providing idempotentHint and openWorldHint, the description adds critical behavioral context: 'we never charge', 'we hold the rate + attribute the booking', 'payment always completes on LUXSKI'. It also notes OAuth requirement, going beyond annotations.

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?

The description is concise at 4 sentences, front-loading the purpose. It could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but is efficient and clear.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (two modes, auth, external payment), the description covers all major aspects: what it does, prerequisites, and side effects. Output schema exists, so return values need not be explained.

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% (baseline 3). The description adds meaning by explaining that hotelName+dates trigger prebooking and checkout URL, and that powderEventId is optional for attribution. This enhances understanding beyond schema descriptions.

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 tool finds lodging near a resort via LUXSKI for the signed-in user. It distinguishes two modes: with hotelName+dates prebooks and returns a checkout URL, without returns availability+booking link. The verb 'find' and 'prebook' are specific and differentiate from siblings like find_flights_to_powder.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explains when to use which mode (with vs without hotelName) and requires a SnowSure user access token. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternatives, though it is clear in context.

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

All SnowSure — Snow & Ski tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tool clusters have unclear boundaries: get_resort overlaps with get_resort_info and get_resort_photos, ask_snowdata competes with compare_resorts and the El Niño tools, and get_snow_history / get_season_leaderboard / get_insights cover similar retrospective ground. The descriptions try hard to route agents, but with 45 tools an agent will frequently have to choose between near-equivalent options.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a clear verb_noun snake_case pattern: get_resort_info, compare_resorts, find_best_powder, book_lodging, save_resort. Minor deviations like ask_snowdata and the very similar get_resort vs get_resort_info names prevent a 5, but overall the naming convention is predictable.

Tool Count2/5

45 tools is well above the 25+ threshold and puts a heavy selection burden on the agent. While the domain is broad, many tools are narrow variations on conditions, history, road data, or trip planning that could be consolidated or exposed as configurable parameters.

Completeness4/5

The toolkit covers an impressively wide lifecycle: resort discovery, photos, live conditions, forecasts, history, comparisons, passes, flights, lodging, road status, alerts, and user saved resorts. Minor gaps exist such as no lift-ticket booking, no lesson/rental booking, and flight search only produces links rather than a booking flow, but agents can generally complete core snow-trip workflows.

Resources

Need Help?