Yenta Directory

Get a destination listing by name

destination_listing

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get one listing's full detail by its id, including a live linked venue's mcp_endpoint and linked_venue_slug to read or book it via the venue_* tools (the destination's own host calls this get_listing).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`listing_id`	Yes	The listing's id, as returned by destination_listings.
`destination`	Yes	Destination name or slug; call search_destinations to discover one.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`item`	No
`items`	No
`reason`	No
`sample`	No
`source`	No	FR-13: which approved revision an answer was read from, and how fresh. ``source`` is ``approved-content-revision:<id>`` for every read that answers from one venue, and the literal ``directory`` for the two cross-venue reads, which have no single revision to cite.
`status`	Yes
`pagination`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 23, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / sample

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Sample"
+}

First observedSep 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds context about the returned data including mcp_endpoint and linked_venue_slug, and notes the destination host's internal name for the tool. This adds value beyond the annotations without contradiction.

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 sentence that conveys the core purpose first, then adds the important detail about the linked venue info and the host's alias. It is slightly dense but efficient, with no wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple, has an output schema, and annotations cover safety. The description explains the return content and its relationship to venue_* tools, and the schema covers the parameters. There is no missing critical information for an agent to call this correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, with both parameters described in the input schema. The description does not add new information about the parameters beyond referencing the id and destination. The baseline of 3 applies as the schema handles the parameter documentation.

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 action (Get), the resource (one listing's full detail), and the specific retrieval method (by id). It also distinguishes itself from the plural destination_listings tool by specifying it returns a single listing. The mention of the venue_* tools further clarifies its role.

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 implies usage context: it's the tool to get a single listing's full detail, and it explicitly mentions how to use the returned data for venue_* tools. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools like destination_listings, though the singular vs plural distinction is implicit.

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

All Yenta Directory tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?