SimFuse eSIM Storefront

Get destination info

get-destination-info

Read-onlyIdempotent

Details for one destination: its name and codes, region, how many eSIM plans are sold there, the cheapest and most expensive, the smallest and largest data bundles, and its storefront page. Takes a country name ("Japan") or two-letter code ("JP"). Use this to describe a destination before pulling its full plan ladder with list-plans. Whether a plan can be topped up varies by plan and is reported by list-plans, not here.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "destination": "<destination>"
    },
    "name": "get-destination-info"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`currency`	No	Three-letter currency code for the prices (e.g. "USD", "EUR"). Defaults to EUR.
`destination`	Yes	The destination: a country name ("Japan") or a two-letter code ("JP").

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`iso2`	Yes	ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code, e.g. "JP". This is the code list-plans and plan-trip take.
`iso3`	Yes	ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 code, e.g. "JPN".
`name`	Yes	English country name, e.g. "Japan".
`note`	Yes	How to read the numbers above, and what to call next.
`links`	Yes
`plans`	Yes
`region`	Yes	The region this country is filed under, e.g. "Asia". Null when it is filed under none.
`currency`	Yes	ISO 4217 code every amount below is quoted in, e.g. "EUR".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds valuable scope context beyond that: the top-up caveat and the fact that pricing extremes and bundle sizes are surfaced here, which shapes agent expectations. It stops short of noting cost/rate behavior or aggregation semantics, so not a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with what the tool returns, then usage routing, then the exclusion caveat — a sensible order. It is somewhat dense as a single block and repeats the destination format already in the schema, but no sentence is truly wasted.

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?

With rich annotations and an output schema in place, the remaining burden is scoping — and the description covers it: return contents are summarized, the next step (list-plans) is named, and a likely false expectation (top-up info) is pre-empted. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly is missing.

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% and both parameters are documented in the schema, so the baseline applies. The description's note that destination accepts a name or a two-letter code duplicates the schema's own wording, and the currency parameter (with its EUR default) is never mentioned in the description.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Details for one destination') and enumerates the exact fields returned (name/codes, region, plan counts, cheapest/most expensive, smallest/largest bundles, storefront page). This clearly separates it from list-destinations (which lists many) and list-plans (which returns the plan ladder).

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 routes the agent: 'Use this to describe a destination before pulling its full plan ladder with list-plans.' It also names a boundary case — top-up eligibility is answered by list-plans, not here — so the agent knows both what this tool is for and when to pick the sibling instead.

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

All SimFuse eSIM Storefront 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?