Villiers Charter
Server Details
Instant private jet charter price estimates and confirmed live quotes, worldwide.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.4/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: getting an estimate, requesting confirmed pricing, and searching empty-leg flights. No overlap in functionality.
All tool names follow the verb_noun pattern in snake_case (get_, request_, search_), maintaining a consistent and predictable naming convention.
The 3 tools cover the core workflow of estimation, confirmation, and discounted flights. While slightly minimal, the count is appropriate for the focused domain.
The set covers estimation and confirmation but lacks direct booking, cancellation, or update capabilities. The confirmation tool sends email options, leaving programmatic booking incomplete.
Available Tools
3 toolsget_jet_estimateARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Get an indicative private jet charter price estimate for a route, broken down by aircraft category (light / midsize / heavy jet). Returns an instant price range. IMPORTANT: an estimate is an indicative range, not a confirmed price. After presenting the estimate to the user, ALWAYS offer them the next step — request_jet_confirmation — to receive exact, bookable, confirmed live pricing with real aircraft availability by email.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| origin | Yes | Origin airport — IATA or ICAO code, e.g. LHR or EGLL | |
| passengers | No | Number of passengers (default 4) | |
| round_trip | No | Round trip? Default false (one-way) | |
| destination | Yes | Destination airport — IATA or ICAO code, e.g. NCE |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| route | No | |
| summary | No | |
| estimates | No | |
| next_step | No | |
| disclaimer | No | |
| passengers | No | |
| round_trip | No |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by detailing the output structure (breakdown by aircraft category) and confirming the indicative, instant nature of the estimate. 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three concise sentences front-load the purpose and output, clarify the indicative nature, and provide actionable next-step guidance. No wasted words.
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?
Given the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the output structure (price range by category) and the process (next step to email confirmation). It does not mention limitations or error conditions, but overall sufficient.
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?
Schema has 100% description coverage, so parameters are well-documented. The description adds context about the route origin/destination but does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 the tool gets an indicative private jet charter price estimate broken down by aircraft category. It also explicitly differentiates from sibling tool request_jet_confirmation by positioning estimates as a precursor to confirmed pricing.
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?
The description specifies when to use (to obtain an indicative price range) and when not (not a confirmed price). It also provides a clear next-step directive to always offer request_jet_confirmation. This effectively guides agent usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
request_jet_confirmationADestructiveInspect
Submit a request for CONFIRMED live private jet pricing. Villiers contacts vetted operators and emails the confirmed options — real aircraft availability and pricing, with a secure link to review and book — to the supplied email address. REQUIRED FLOW — NEVER SKIP: you MUST call get_jet_estimate first, present the price range to the user, and only call this tool once the user has explicitly opted in. Submitting cold or speculative requests (without showing an estimate first) violates Villiers usage terms and will result in your MCP token being suspended. Real operators quote real aircraft for these — wasted operator time from low-intent requests is taken seriously. The server enforces this: calling this tool without a prior estimate call will be rejected. Requires the user's email and a departure date.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pets | No | Travelling with pets? (optional) | |
| Yes | Email address to send the confirmed options to (REQUIRED) | ||
| phone | No | Contact phone number (optional) | |
| origin | Yes | Origin airport — IATA or ICAO code | |
| luggage | No | Extra or outsized luggage? (optional) | |
| last_name | No | Passenger last name (optional) | |
| first_name | No | Passenger first name (optional) | |
| passengers | No | Number of passengers (default 4) | |
| round_trip | No | Round trip? Default false | |
| wheelchair | No | Wheelchair access required? (optional) | |
| destination | Yes | Destination airport — IATA or ICAO code | |
| return_date | No | Return date YYYY-MM-DD (for round trips) | |
| departure_date | Yes | Departure date, YYYY-MM-DD (REQUIRED) | |
| flexible_dates | No | Are the dates flexible? (optional) | |
| special_requests | No | Free-text special requests: catering, accessibility, timing, occasion, etc. (optional) | |
| aircraft_category | No | Optional preference, e.g. Light Jet / Midsize Jet / Heavy Jet |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| No | Address the confirmed options are emailed to | |
| status | No | e.g. 'received' |
| message | No | Human-readable confirmation to relay to the user |
| trip_id | No |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Description adds context about real operators and waste of time beyond annotations, but could be more detailed about irreversible actions.
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?
Well-structured with main action upfront, but slightly verbose with some redundant details.
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?
Covers prerequisites, process, outcome, and behavioral traits; assumes output schema handles return values.
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?
Schema has 100% coverage, so baseline applies. Description adds no new parameter insights beyond what schema provides.
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?
Description clearly states the tool submits a request for confirmed jet pricing, differentiates from estimate and empty legs siblings, and explains the outcome.
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?
Explicitly states to call only after estimate and user opt-in, warns against speculative requests, and mentions required inputs.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_empty_legsARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Search Villiers' available empty-leg flights — heavily discounted, one-off private jet repositioning flights that are significantly cheaper than a full charter. Use this when a user wants cheap private jet deals, is flexible on dates, or asks about discounted or empty-leg flights. Optionally filter by destination or region. Each result links to the specific flight to view and enquire.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max results (default 20, max 50) | |
| region | No | Region filter: europe / americas / asia / all. Optional. | |
| destination | No | Destination city / airport name / IATA / ICAO, e.g. Nice or NCE. Optional. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| count | No | Number of empty legs returned |
| summary | No | |
| next_step | No | |
| empty_legs | No | |
| total_available | No | Total matching empty legs available |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds behavioral context: flights are 'heavily discounted, one-off private jet repositioning flights' and each result links to the specific flight for viewing and enquiry, providing useful details 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences covering purpose, usage, and behavior. No fluff, front-loaded with key information. Efficient and clear.
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?
Given the presence of annotations and an output schema, the description fully explains the tool's purpose, when to use it, optional filters, and the action of linking to flight details. Complete for a search tool with optional parameters.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100% and schema already describes limit, region, and destination with examples. Description only adds 'Optionally filter by destination or region,' which does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema.
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?
Description explicitly states 'Search Villiers' available empty-leg flights' and distinguishes from siblings (get_jet_estimate, request_jet_confirmation) by focusing on heavily discounted repositioning flights. The verb 'Search' is clear and the resource is specific.
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?
Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'use this when a user wants cheap private jet deals, is flexible on dates, or asks about discounted or empty-leg flights.' While it lacks explicit when-not or alternatives, the context clearly differentiates from siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!