eSIM Eagle Plan Finder

Find Esim Plans Tool

find_esim_plans

Read-only

Finds up to five live eSIM plans that cover every requested country or region, priced for the trip length, data need, currency, and locale. Use the returned checkout URL to buy.

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": {
      "destinations": "<destinations>",
      "trip_days": "<trip_days>"
    },
    "name": "find_esim_plans"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`locale`	No	Language for destination names, activation guidance, and checkout URLs.	en
`currency`	No	ISO 4217 display currency code.	USD
`data_need`	No	Expected data usage. Recommended assumes about 500 MB per day.	recommended
`trip_days`	Yes	Number of travel days.
`destinations`	Yes	One to ten ISO country codes, destination slugs, or exact English destination names, such as JP, japan, or Europe.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`plans`	Yes
`locale`	Yes
`message`	Yes
`currency`	Yes
`data_need`	Yes
`trip_days`	Yes
`plan_count`	Yes
`destinations`	Yes
`recommended_data_mb`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedAug 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds value beyond them: a hard cap of five results, a guarantee that every requested destination is covered, and the fact that prices are localized by trip length, data tier, currency and locale, plus a checkout URL in the response.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core behavior and followed by the actionable post-call step. No filler or restatement of the title.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape need not be described, and the description covers coverage semantics, result cap and pricing inputs. It omits edge behavior, such as what is returned when no plan satisfies all destinations, which is the only material gap for a search tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3; the description still adds meaning by stating that destinations are treated as an all-must-be-covered set (not any-match) and that trip_days, data_need, currency and locale jointly drive pricing. That interaction logic is not spelled out in the field descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb ('Finds') and resource ('live eSIM plans') and narrows scope with three concrete constraints: coverage of every requested country, pricing driven by trip length/data/currency/locale, and a five-result cap. An agent knows exactly what this call produces without opening the schema.

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?

'Use the returned checkout URL to buy' explains what to do with the result, not when to select this tool over anything else; there are no siblings to route against. The eligibility context (multi-country coverage) is implied by the description rather than stated as a when-to-use rule.

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

All eSIM Eagle Plan Finder 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?