Start general traveler verification for this MCP session after the traveler confirms their email address. The default is a six-digit email code. This does not create a quote, enquiry, hold, or booking.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| method | No | ||
| agentName | No | ||
| guestName | Yes | ||
| guestEmail | Yes | ||
| guestPhone | No | ||
| agentProvider | No | ||
| propertyToken | No | ||
| emailConfirmedByTraveler | Yes | True only after the traveler confirms the exact email address. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already signal this is not read-only and may have open-world effects. The description adds useful context by noting the default six-digit email code and stating that no quote, enquiry, hold, or booking is created. However, it does not disclose the actual postcondition, such as sending a code or creating a verification session.
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?
Two concise sentences front-load the main purpose and precondition, then add a useful boundary statement. There is no filler or redundant restating of the schema.
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?
The description covers the essential invocation context, but with no output schema and no mention of what the caller should do after starting verification, an agent is left uncertain about return values and the follow-up path (e.g., using verify_traveler_code). This is adequate but not complete.
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 only 13%, so the description carries most of the burden for parameter meaning, but it only clarifies the default method and the email-confirmation precondition. It adds no detail on propertyToken, agentProvider, guestPhone, or agentName, and only lightly covers method beyond the default.
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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Start general traveler verification for this MCP session.' It also gives a clear precondition ('after the traveler confirms their email address') and distinguishes itself from booking-related siblings by explicitly saying it does not create a quote, enquiry, hold, or booking.
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 gives a clear trigger condition: use after the traveler confirms their email address. It also clarifies what the tool is not for, which helps disambiguate from booking/quote tools, though it does not explicitly name or route to the obviously related sibling verify_traveler_code.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
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.
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.
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.
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.