AwardSecrets Award Availability
Server Details
Award seat availability from a contracted GDS. One route, one airline, one date.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Available Tools
1 toolsearch_award_availabilityAInspect
Look up award (points/miles) seat availability for ONE specific flight route on ONE specific date with ONE specific airline, sourced from a contracted GDS rather than scraped. Returns the flights found with cabin and seat count.
IMPORTANT — this tool is strictly literal. Every argument takes a single concrete value: • origin / destination: exactly one 3-letter IATA airport code each. Not a city, not a list, not a region. • airline: exactly one 2-letter IATA carrier code (e.g. VS, CX, NH). Not an alliance and not a loyalty programme. • date: exactly one date, YYYY-MM-DD. Not a range and not a month.
To cover several airports, airlines or dates, CALL THIS TOOL ONCE PER COMBINATION and combine the results yourself. Award space is scarce and volatile, so an empty result for one date says nothing about another — checking several dates is normal and expected.
Interpreting the result: • seats is an availability indicator, not a guaranteed bookable count, and not a reservation. Low counts are the more precise signal; treat higher ones as less certain. Do not present any count as a firm number of seats a user can book. • cabin is one of business, first, economy or premium_economy. • An empty result means no availability was surfaced for that exact combination at that moment; it is not proof that the route never has space. • Availability changes fast. Treat every result as a point-in-time observation, not a reservation.
If the call is declined for want of an API key, say so plainly and point the user at https://awardsecrets.com/api.html — access is in limited release and keys are issued individually. Do not invent availability, and do not substitute a guess for a result you could not retrieve.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | Yes | One departure date, YYYY-MM-DD. | |
| cabin | No | Cabin to search. Defaults to business. | business |
| origin | Yes | Departure airport, one 3-letter IATA code (e.g. JFK). | |
| airline | Yes | One 2-letter IATA airline code (e.g. VS, CX, NH). | |
| passengers | No | Number of seats required. Defaults to 1. | |
| destination | Yes | Arrival airport, one 3-letter IATA code (e.g. LHR). |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden and does so thoroughly: it states the literal matching behavior, GDS data sourcing, seat/cabin result semantics, point-in-time volatility, empty-result caveats, API-key failure handling, and prohibition against inventing availability.
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?
All paragraphs carry necessary operational guidance; the opening sentence front-loads the purpose and the bulleted restrictions are scannable. Despite length, there is no filler or repetition of schema beyond the useful caveats.
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 tool has six parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, yet the description explains the return concept ('flights found with cabin and seat count'), interprets seats/cabin, covers empty results, and addresses error handling. This makes the tool safe to invoke correctly in context.
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?
Although the schema covers all parameters at 100%, the description adds real semantics: origin/destination must be exactly one IATA code not a city/list/region; airline must be a carrier code not an alliance; date must be one YYYY-MM-DD not a range/month. It also clarifies that seats is an availability indicator rather than a bookable count.
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 verb phrase 'Look up award (points/miles) seat availability' names a specific resource and scope (one route, one date, one airline), and the description distinguishes its data source ('contracted GDS rather than scraped'). Even with no siblings, the purpose is unambiguous.
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?
It explicitly constrains each argument to a single concrete value and provides when-not guidance (not city/list/region, not alliance/loyalty programme, not date range/month). It gives an explicit repeat-call pattern ('CALL THIS TOOL ONCE PER COMBINATION') and normalizes empty results across dates.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Frequently Asked Questions
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as
io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user or an account that owns the GitHub organization, then choose Claim with GitHub.HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at
/.well-known/glama.jsonon the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Connectors
Search award flight availability and points pricing across 27 airlines and 23 loyalty programs.
Official airline award MCP. Search 12.3M+ award flights across 48 loyalty programs.
Live flight prices and working booking links for AI agents and travel apps.
Flight search & booking for AI agents. 400+ airlines, $20-50 cheaper than OTAs.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to search one-way, round-trip, and multi-city itineraries and retrieve fares, flight legs, carbon emissions and price history as structured JSON.214657MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceSearches multiple flight inventory sources concurrently and returns a normalized, deduplicated result set.4MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceOfficial Industry Standard MCP for Travel Awards, Points, and more. Search award flight availability across multiple airline loyalty programs, find sweet spots, check transfer partners, and get market stats all via MCP.1
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables real-time one-way and round-trip flight searches from any MCP client without an API key or account, returning live fares, historical price insights, and bookable links supported by disclosed sponsored cards.MIT
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion between tools. The tool's purpose is highly specific and clearly described.
The single tool name 'search_award_availability' follows a clear verb_noun pattern and is fully descriptive, with no other tools to create inconsistency.
A single tool feels thin even for a narrow purpose like award availability lookup, but it is not outright excessive. The borderline range (1-2 tools) applies here.
The tool fully covers the stated domain of searching award availability for a specific route, date, and airline. No other operations are needed for a lookup-only service.