Skip to main content
Glama

Hungry eSIM

by com.hungry-esim

Find the cheapest eSIM plan

find_cheapest_plan
Read-only

Find the lowest-priced eSIM data plan for a destination — for "what's the cheapest", "budget option", "cheapest SIM / data plan for X". Pass days (trip length) to rank by what the traveller actually pays for the whole trip: unlimited plans are priced per day with a multi-day discount, fixed-data plans by their sticker price, and plans that expire before the trip ends are dropped. Without days it ranks by daily rate. Returns up to 3 options with variant_id for create_checkout.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoTrip length in days. When given, plans are ranked by total trip cost.
limitNoHow many options to return, default 3
countryYesISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code of the destination, e.g. 'JP', 'US'
currencyNoISO currency for prices, default the store currency
min_data_gbNoMinimum data in GB (applies to fixed-data plans; unlimited always qualifies)

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description provides rich behavioral details beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: it explains ranking by total trip cost vs daily rate, dropping plans expiring before trip end, and what 'unlimited always qualifies' means for min_data_gb. This fully informs the agent of the tool's internal logic.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded paragraph of four sentences. Each sentence adds value: purpose, usage trigger, ranking behavior conditional on 'days', and output details. No wasted words.

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?

With 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers return structure (up to 3 options with variant_id) and edge cases (expired plans dropped). It could mention default currency behavior, but overall it is quite complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 100%, the description adds meaningful context: how 'days' affects ranking, that 'limit' defaults to 3, and how 'min_data_gb' applies only to fixed-data plans. This goes beyond the raw schema definitions.

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 clearly states it finds the lowest-priced eSIM data plan for a destination, with specific usage examples like 'what's the cheapest' and 'budget option'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_esim_plans by focusing on price minimization and ranking logic.

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 explains when to use the tool (budget queries) and how the 'days' parameter changes ranking behavior. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate usage.

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

All Hungry eSIM toolsInspect
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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The tools are mostly distinct: search/check/find for discovery, get/list for details, create/topup for purchase, and order/esim management. The only mild overlap is between check_destination_coverage and find_cheapest_plan, but the description clarifies when to use each. Overall clear boundaries.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: check_destination_coverage, find_cheapest_plan, search_esim_plans, get_plan_details, create_checkout, get_order_status, list_esim_topups, topup_esim, my_esims, my_orders. The 'my_' prefix for account-specific lists is a clear, consistent exception that serves its purpose.

Tool Count5/5

Ten tools is an ideal count for an eSIM travel data server. Each tool covers a necessary step in the user journey: discovery (search, check, find), details (get_plan_details), purchase (create_checkout), post-purchase (get_order_status, my_orders), and management (my_esims, list_esim_topups, topup_esim). Nothing feels redundant or missing.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle: searching/checking coverage for a destination, getting plan details, purchasing, checking order status, viewing purchased eSIMs, topping up, and listing orders. No obvious gaps—this covers everything a traveller would need from planning to refilling data.

Resources