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

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false which already indicate mutation. The description adds value by clarifying that no charge is made until user confirms on the URL, and lists prerequisite data sources. This goes beyond annotation defaults.

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 purpose, followed by key behavior and prerequisites. No wasted words, every sentence adds value. Ideal length for quick comprehension.

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 complex tool with 14 params and no output schema, the description covers the high-level workflow, prerequisite steps, key constraint (no charge), and return type (URL). Could mention error conditions or what happens if user does not confirm, but overall adequate given annotations.

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 description coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description adds specific guidance on using 'grandTotal' from 'get_checkout_quote' for the price parameter, which exceeds what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is elevated due to this added context.

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 ('create') and resource ('one-click checkout'), clearly stating it returns a URL for user confirmation and payment. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_checkout' by specifying the one-click aspect and pre-selected card.

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 provides explicit guidance: does not charge, user confirms on hosted page, get payment method from 'list_payment_methods', confirm details with user first. It implies prerequisite steps but does not explicitly name alternatives like 'create_checkout' for non-one-click flows.

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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct action or resource, e.g., search vs search_hotels, get_booking vs get_my_booking. No overlapping functionality; descriptions clarify subtle differences.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow verb_noun pattern (add_trip_item, cancel_booking) or get_/list_ prefixes. One outlier ('fetch') breaks the pattern slightly, but overall naming is predictable.

Tool Count5/5

18 tools cover the hotel booking domain comprehensively without being excessive. Each tool has a clear role in the workflow from search to booking to modification.

Completeness5/5

Covers all key lifecycle stages: search, details, rooms, pricing, checkout (standard and one-click), booking management (list, get, cancel, modify), payment methods, and trip saving. No obvious gaps.

Resources

Need Help?