ATA Travel

search_flexible_network_availability

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find real, priced ATA stays when the traveler is flexible. Defaults to a window 28–56 days from today, three nights, and two adults only when those values are missing; always return those defaults as explicit assumptions. Preferences are soft ranking signals, not a closed taxonomy.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`views`	No	Optional soft view preferences for flexible discovery.
`adults`	No	Adult guests. Defaults to 2.
`nights`	No	Length of stay. Defaults to 3 nights.
`children`	No	Child guests. Defaults to 0.
`location`	No	Optional city, state, country, neighborhood, or building. Omit when the traveler is open to ATA's current destinations.
`maxPrice`	No	Maximum total stay price.
`amenities`	No	Optional soft amenity preferences for flexible discovery.
`maxResults`	No	Maximum priced stays to return. Defaults to 4.
`preferences`	No	Open-ended soft preferences inferred from the traveler's own words or live network facets.
`propertyType`	No	Optional soft property-type preference; it ranks results and is reported as a difference when unavailable.
`latestCheckIn`	No	Latest acceptable check-in date. Defaults to 56 days from today.
`priceAudience`	No
`displayCurrency`	No	Optional traveler-facing display currency.
`earliestCheckIn`	No	Earliest acceptable check-in date. Defaults to 28 days from today.
`internalAgentKey`	No
`maxPriceCurrency`	No	Currency for maxPrice when filtering mixed native currencies.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds value by stating that defaults are returned as explicit assumptions and that preferences are soft ranking signals, not a closed taxonomy. This provides insight beyond the annotations, though it could mention how results are ordered or what happens with no matches.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description consists of two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the main purpose and immediately provides crucial default behavior and the key concept of soft preferences. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (16 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the essential behavioral aspects (defaults, soft preferences). It could be improved by noting the result format or ordering, but the schema descriptions and annotations provide sufficient context for an agent to invoke the tool 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 description coverage is 88%, so the schema already provides detailed parameter descriptions. The description adds context about default values (28-56 day window, 3 nights, 2 adults) and the soft nature of preferences, but does not need to repeat schema information. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high coverage.

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 it finds 'real, priced ATA stays when the traveler is flexible', distinguishing it from other search tools like search_network_availability that likely target exact dates. It specifies default parameters (window 28–56 days, 3 nights, 2 adults) and emphasizes that preferences are soft signals, not a closed taxonomy.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool ('when the traveler is flexible') and explains that defaults are applied when values are missing. It does not directly mention alternatives, but the context from sibling tools implies other searches for exact dates. The description could be improved by explicitly stating when not to use it (e.g., for specific date searches).

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

All ATA Travel 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

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Multiple search tools (search_buildings, search_property_catalog, search_network_availability) and detail tools (get_building_details, get_property_details, get_stays_in_building) have overlapping boundaries, though descriptions clarify date and availability distinctions. The verification/handoff tools are more clearly separated but still numerous.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (create_*, get_*, search_*, start_*, verify_*). There are no mixed casing conventions or vague generic verbs, making the set predictable and easy to scan.

Tool Count3/5

With 22 tools, the server is on the heavy end of a typical MCP scope, though each tool has a defined purpose. Several narrow status and discovery helpers inflate the count, but the overall count is not yet extreme.

Completeness2/5

The booking lifecycle is incomplete: create_quote and create_provisional_booking exist, but there is no cancel, update, or explicit payment action, and get_reservation_status explicitly cannot change or cancel a reservation. Search and verification are well covered, but missing booking mutations will cause agent dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?