GetMyHotels

Create one-click checkout

create_one_click_checkout

Destructive

Create a checkout for the signed-in user with a saved card pre-selected, and return a getmyhotels.com URL where they confirm + pay in one click. Does NOT charge the card — the user confirms on the hosted page. Get the savedPaymentMethodPublicId from list_payment_methods. Confirm the hotel, room, dates, and price with the user first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ref`	No	Hotel `ref` from `search_hotels` (e.g. 'TBO:1402689').
`price`	Yes	Total for the WHOLE stay (use `grandTotal` from `get_checkout_quote` verbatim — do not multiply it by the number of nights).
`rooms`	No	Rooms (default 1).
`adults`	No	Adults (default 2).
`checkIn`	Yes	Check-in date, ISO 8601.
`checkOut`	Yes	Check-out date, ISO 8601.
`children`	No	Children (default 0).
`currency`	Yes	ISO 4217 currency (e.g. 'USD').
`roomName`	Yes	Room name.
`hotelName`	Yes	Hotel name.
`supplierCode`	No	Supplier code (if `ref` omitted).
`supplierRoomId`	Yes	Bookable room/rate id from `search_hotels`.
`supplierHotelId`	No	Supplier hotel id (if `ref` omitted).
`savedPaymentMethodPublicId`	Yes	Saved card `publicId` from `list_payment_methods`.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already indicate `destructiveHint: true` and `readOnlyHint: false`, marking it as a mutation. The description clarifies that the card is not charged (user confirms later) but does not disclose other behavioral traits like inventory holds, timeouts, or side effects. While not contradictory, it adds only partial transparency beyond the annotations.

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?

Four sentences with zero wasted words. The first sentence delivers the core purpose, the second clarifies a key behavioral fact (no charge), the third provides a prerequisite instruction, and the fourth recommends user confirmation. Ideal front-loading and efficiency.

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?

For a tool with 14 parameters, 8 required, and no output schema, the description covers the workflow well: it links to sibling tools (`list_payment_methods`, `get_checkout_quote`), explains the payment flow, and advises user confirmation. It could mention error/edge-case behavior but is complete for practical agent usage.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, yet the description adds critical meaning: explains that `price` is the `grandTotal` from `get_checkout_quote` (not per night), sources `savedPaymentMethodPublicId` from `list_payment_methods`, and clarifies when to use `ref` vs `supplierCode`/`supplierHotelId`. This is high-value context beyond the schema.

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 specific verbs ('create a checkout') and names the resource ('one-click checkout') with a distinct outcome: a URL for single-click confirmation and payment. It clearly differentiates from siblings like `create_checkout` (standard checkout) and `cancel_booking` (different operation).

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 advises when to use the tool (after confirming details with user, after obtaining `savedPaymentMethodPublicId`) and explicitly states that it does not charge the card. However, it lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance and does not compare directly with the sibling `create_checkout`.

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

All GetMyHotels 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

A4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct action or resource: searching, fetching details, checkout flows, booking management, trips, and payment methods. Overlaps like search vs search_hotels and get_booking vs get_my_booking are differentiated by input type or purpose, avoiding ambiguity.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (e.g., add_trip_item, create_checkout, get_rooms). A few exceptions like `fetch` and `search` lack a verb prefix, but they are still descriptive and fit the overall convention.

Tool Count5/5

With 18 tools, the server covers the full hotel booking lifecycle without overwhelming complexity. Each tool serves a clear purpose, and the count is well-scoped for the domain.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers searching, viewing details, booking, checkout, cancellations, modifications, trips, and payment methods. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no delete_trip or update_payment_method), but the core workflows for booking management are complete.

Resources

Need Help?