GetMyHotels

Search hotels

search_hotels

Read-only

Search live hotel availability for a destination and date range. Returns a price-sorted list of hotels (JSON in the text), each with a ref and its cheapest bookable room's supplierRoomId. To book: pass a room's supplierRoomId + the hotel ref to get_checkout_quote then create_checkout. For a hotel's other rooms (or a hotel not in the list), call get_rooms. Narrow with keywords (a hotel name, area, or amenities).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`rooms`	No	Rooms (1-6). Default 1.
`adults`	No	Adults (1-10). Default 2.
`checkIn`	Yes	Check-in date, ISO 8601 (YYYY-MM-DD).
`checkOut`	Yes	Check-out date, ISO 8601 (YYYY-MM-DD). Must be after check-in.
`children`	No	Children (0-6). Default 0.
`keywords`	No	Optional free-text preferences, e.g. 'beachfront pool spa'.
`destination`	Yes	City, region, or place to search (e.g. 'Paris', 'Goa', 'Lower Manhattan').
`childrenAges`	No	Age of each child at check-in. Length should equal `children`.
`guestNationality`	No	ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 guest nationality (e.g. 'US', 'GB'). Affects supplier pricing.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating safe read operation. The description adds that the output is a JSON text with price-sorted list, and explains the return fields ('ref' and 'supplierRoomId'), which goes beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Description is compact (5 sentences), front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by workflow guidance, and then parameter hints. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given no output schema, the description explains the return format (JSON, price-sorted, fields) and how to proceed with booking. It mentions narrowing via keywords but lacks details on pagination or result limits. Still, it covers the essential context for a search tool.

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 coverage is 100% with all 9 parameters described. The description adds value by explaining 'keywords' as 'a hotel name, area, or amenities' and notes that 'guestNationality' affects pricing, but these are minor enhancements. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states 'Search live hotel availability for a destination and date range' and specifies output as 'price-sorted list of hotels' with 'ref' and 'supplierRoomId'. This differentiates from siblings like 'get_rooms' and 'get_hotel_details'.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly tells when to use this tool (to search and get cheapest room) versus alternatives: 'For a hotel's other rooms (or a hotel not in the list), call get_rooms'. It also outlines the booking workflow using sibling tools 'get_checkout_quote' and '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

A4.2/5.0

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?