Villiers Charter

request_jet_confirmation

Destructive

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. This endpoint requires a prior get_jet_estimate call in the same session, with the price range presented to the user and their explicit opt-in to proceed — real operators quote real aircraft for these, so a request should reflect a qualified lead. Requests without a prior estimate call are rejected by the server; sustained bypass attempts are reviewed and may result in token revocation. Requires the user's email and a departure date. SANDBOX TESTING: to test your integration without ever creating a real trip or contacting a real operator, use email 'sandbox-test@mail.villiers.ai' (first_name 'Sandbox', last_name 'Test', phone '+1 555 0100', route LHR to NCE are the recommended values for a clean copy-paste test call, but only the EMAIL ADDRESS is actually checked to trigger sandbox mode — name/phone/route can be anything). Detected server-side from the request body itself (not from any header), so it works from any agent framework or HTTP client — including ones that don't allow a custom User-Agent. The response will say 'Test request accepted (sandbox mode detected)'. For further testing guidance, email affiliates@mail.villiers.ai.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`pets`	No	Travelling with pets? (optional)
`email`	Yes	Email address to send the confirmed options to (REQUIRED)
`phone`	No	Contact phone number (optional)
`origin`	Yes	Origin airport — city / airport name / IATA / ICAO, e.g. London or LHR or EGLL (same as get_jet_estimate)
`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 — city / airport name / IATA / ICAO, e.g. Nice or NCE (same as get_jet_estimate)
`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)
`client_reference`	No	Optional opaque reference from YOUR OWN system (e.g. your internal order/booking id) for this request. Stored against the trip and echoed back unchanged in the response. Pass it here, then use get_confirmation_status with the returned trip_id to check the outcome later — no webhook needed. Never shown to the client or operator. (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

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`email`	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	Pass this to get_confirmation_status later to poll the outcome
`client_reference`	No	Echoed back unchanged if you supplied one

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description adds important context: it contacts real operators, sends emails to the user, requires a qualified lead, enforces the prior estimate call with server-side rejection, and may revoke tokens for bypass attempts. Sandbox mode behavior is also disclosed, adding significant value 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 longer than average but well-structured: it front-loads the purpose, then clarifies prerequisites, provides sandbox testing details, and closes with support contact. Every sentence serves a purpose, though the sandbox section is lengthy and slightly repetitive about the prior estimate requirement.

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?

This is a complex tool with real-world side effects and 17 parameters, yet the description covers prerequisites, consequences, sandbox mode, and support contact. The output schema exists, so return values need not be described. It is complete enough for an agent to use correctly, including handling of errors and testing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 17 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter-specific detail—it correctly highlights email and departure date as essential, and explains the sandbox email trigger. However, it omits origin and destination as required (though the schema lists them), so it does not fully compensate. Overall, schema carries the load.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Submit a request for CONFIRMED live private jet pricing.' It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling get_jet_estimate by requiring a prior estimate call and from get_confirmation_status by describing the submission of the request rather than status checking.

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 that a prior get_jet_estimate call is required and that requests without one are rejected. It also provides sandbox testing instructions with a specific email to avoid real-world impact, and directs further questions to an email. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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

All Villiers Charter 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

A4.5/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool serves a distinct, clearly defined purpose: estimates, confirmed pricing requests, status checks, and empty-leg searches. There is no overlap or ambiguity between tool functions.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (get_, request_, search_), making it easy to predict tool behavior from the name alone.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools precisely cover the core capabilities needed for a private jet charter assistant: estimation, confirmation, status tracking, and empty-leg deals. No tool feels redundant or missing.

Completeness4/5

The set covers the primary workflow (estimate → request confirmation → check status) and adds empty-leg search. However, the actual booking is handled externally via email, and there is no tool to modify or cancel requests.

Resources

Need Help?