upgrade-agent

Place Upgrade Bid

place_bid

Place an upgrade bid for a booking the traveler has already checked with start_eligibility_check. Pass the sessionId from that check plus the amount (and the target cabin/segment if the booking has more than one option). The amount is validated against the airline's real min/max range. Payment is completed securely on the operator's offer page — this tool prepares the bid and returns that handoff link; it never asks for card details or the PNR in the chat. Use get_bid_status to confirm, modify_bid to change it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`amount`	Yes	Bid amount in the offer currency.
`confirm`	No	Set true to confirm and commit a REAL bid submission (human-in-the-loop). Only required once live bid submission is enabled; otherwise the bid is staged for secure payment.
`segment`	No	Route 'YUL-LHR' or flight number, if more than one segment is eligible.
`quantity`	No	Number of seats (default 1).
`sessionId`	No	The sessionId from start_eligibility_check. Optional if conversationId is passed (reuses the last checked booking).
`upgradeType`	No	Target cabin, if the booking has more than one eligible option.
`conversationId`	No	Stable conversation id used on get_eligibility_result — lets you bid without re-passing the sessionId.
`presentationReport`	No	REPORT WHAT YOU SHOWED: if you filtered, hid, or deprioritized ANY offer from the eligibility result before presenting to the traveler, report every offer here with shown + reason. Contains no traveler data; powers partner analytics.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	No	Whether the bid was staged successfully.
`stage`	No	e.g. 'needs_payment' — where the bid is in the flow.
`amount`	No
`currency`	No
`handoffUrl`	No	Secure operator page to complete payment, when applicable.
`competitiveness`	No	Bid Analysis: acceptance odds for THIS bid, present only when enough resolved outcomes exist.
`reasoningBricks`	No	Model-legible reasons to present alongside the bid (Reasoning Bricks).

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds important behavioral context: payment is completed on the operator's page, not via chat, and the tool returns a handoff link. This goes beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions.

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 a single paragraph of four sentences, covering purpose, prerequisites, conditional inputs, security, and related tools. Every sentence adds value with minimal redundancy. Slightly dense but still 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 has 8 parameters (1 required), full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description provides sufficient context: workflow steps, prerequisites, security handling, and links to sibling tools. Nothing critical is missing.

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% with descriptions for all 8 parameters. The description adds meaningful context: sessionId from the eligibility check, amount validated against airline range, and conditional use of segment/upgradeType. These additions help the agent understand parameter relationships and usage.

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?

Clearly states the action (place an upgrade bid) and the resource (a booking). Distinguishes from siblings by referencing start_eligibility_check, get_bid_status, and modify_bid. The verb and resource are specific and unambiguous.

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 states prerequisites (must have used start_eligibility_check), required inputs (sessionId, amount), and conditional inputs (target cabin/segment). Provides guidance on when to use related tools: get_bid_status to confirm and modify_bid to change the bid.

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

All upgrade-agent 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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct function or workflow step (e.g., general info vs booking-specific check, bid placement vs bid status, partner lookup vs pricing), and descriptions clarify when to use which. Even overlapping actions like check_upgrade_eligibility and start_eligibility_check are clearly differentiated by context.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (e.g., check_upgrade_eligibility, place_bid, get_bid_status). A few deviate slightly (partner_question_insights, usage_totals) but the naming is still intuitive and readable overall.

Tool Count4/5

17 tools is at the upper end of typical but still well-scoped given the breadth of functionalities (eligibility, bidding, watch, partner info, analytics). Every tool has a clear purpose, so the count feels justified rather than bloated.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the full lifecycle of upgrade management: eligibility check, bid placement/modification/status, pricing, partner info, watch, and system metrics. A minor gap is the absence of a cancel bid tool, but the main workflows are complete.

Resources

Need Help?