Escape the Week

booking_manifest

Everything an agent needs to book one weekend, in the order to book it. Returns items (flights, hotel and bookable steps; scarcest first) each with kind, title, when (date YYYY-MM-DD and local time HH:MM), the affiliate-tracked partner url with dates, party size and time prefilled where the partner supports it, provider, estimated_cost {cents, currency} for the whole party, reserve_days, book_by (YYYY-MM-DD), fallback and alternatives [{provider, url}]: other sites that book the same item (the hotel on Klook beside Booking.com), to compare, booking one of them, never both; plus needs_from_user (traveller names, contact, payment approval), a sequence_note, the total estimate in integer cents, cancellation_advice and a disclosure that the links are affiliate links. Escape the Week never takes payment: open each url in a browser and have the person approve every payment on the partner's site. Prices are estimates, not quotes.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`city`	Yes	City slug from list_cities, e.g. lisbon.
`lang`	No	BCP 47 language of the published text, e.g. es (default English).
`tier`	No	Budget tier, cheapest to most lavish (default modest). Scales every price line.
`party`	No	Who is travelling, to check the persona fits (optional); never changes a price.
`friday`	Yes	The Friday of the weekend as a YYYY-MM-DD date (it must be a Friday); the weekend runs Friday to Monday. Enables a real fare.
`origin`	No	Origin slug from list_origins, e.g. barcelona; adds flights.
`persona`	Yes	Persona slug from list_personas, e.g. foodie.
`travellers`	No	Group size, 1-20 (default 2). Prices are for the whole group.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 31, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly: it discloses affiliate-tracked links, that Escape the Week never takes payment, that a human must approve every payment on the partner site, that prices are estimates not quotes, and that alternatives should be compared but never booked together.

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 front-loaded with purpose and is dense rather than padded; most details earn their place because there is no output schema. However, it is a single long paragraph that could be more scannable, which slightly reduces structure quality.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description is complete enough: it explains the return structure, ordering, affiliate disclosure, payment approval flow, cost estimate semantics, and booking alternatives. An agent has what it needs to call and interpret 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 100%, so the input schema already documents all eight parameters including required fields and enums. The description adds context about party-size pricing and weekend dates in the output, but does not add meaningfully to the parameter definitions beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states that this tool returns everything needed to book one weekend, in booking order, with bookable items and associated metadata. It is specific about the resource and output, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like booking_checklist or estimate_itinerary.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by phrases like 'Everything an agent needs to book one weekend' and 'in the order to book it', but the description never states when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions. An agent can infer the context, but explicit routing guidance is absent.

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

All Escape the Week 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?