Skip to main content
Glama

MolTravel

by com.moltravel

tourradar_web-tour-booking

[tourradar] Use this when the user explicitly wants to book a tour and has provided their contact details.

Creates a booking request for a specific tour. Requires real contact details (email, names; phone optional). Always confirm the departure date by checking departures first. Never fabricate or assume user data - always ask for missing information.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYesCustomer email address. If email is not given by the customer, please ask him before executing this endpoint. Never generate email by yourself, always ask customer for give the email before calling this tool.
tourIdYesTour ID
lastNameYes
firstNameYes
paxAdultsYesNumber of the adults. Always ask customer for this information, is important to have it
paxChildrenYesNumber of the children
phoneNumberNoCustomer phone number in E-164 format. Is optional, but recommended to provide it. Never put fake phone number, always ask customer for give the phone number before calling this tool. If customer do not gives phone number, just skip this field
departureDateYesDeparture date, from customer selection
agentInformationYesAgent information about the booking. Describe here what customer is looked for, preferences etc, what you can recognize. Will be helpful for our Customer Support team to understand the customer needs.
extraInformationYesCustomer extra information from the customer or agent. Fill here if customer has provided any additional information about the booking. This is optional and can be empty.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It goes beyond the basic action by emphasizing that real contact details are required, that the agent must never fabricate or assume user data, and that missing information should be asked for. This adds valuable operational constraints beyond the schema, though it does not describe post-creation behavior or side effects.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with the usage condition, and every sentence adds necessary context: action, prerequisites, confirmation step, and anti-fabrication warning. 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?

For a write tool with 10 parameters and no output schema, the description covers when to use, required data, a critical prerequisite (check departures), and behavioral guardrails. It could be more explicit about the nature of a 'booking request' (e.g., that it's not a final booking), but overall it is quite complete for the given complexity.

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 description coverage is high (80%), so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds a general requirement for 'real contact details (email, names; phone optional)' and stresses to ask for missing info, which complements the schema but does not significantly add per-parameter semantics beyond what's already present.

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 the action ('Creates a booking request') and the resource ('a specific tour'), and specifies the triggering condition ('when the user explicitly wants to book a tour and has provided their contact details'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like tourradar_web-ask-question or tourradar_web-tour-send-brochure.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('when the user explicitly wants to book a tour and has provided their contact details') and provides a procedural guideline ('Always confirm the departure date by checking departures first'). It does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternative tools, which keeps it just short of a 5.

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

All MolTravel 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

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools are namespaced by vendor and resource, so ferry, tour, flight, hotel, and experience searches are broadly distinguishable. However, hotel search exists in both skiplagged and trivago, ferryhopper_search_trips is a deprecated duplicate of search_trips_v2, and several skiplagged calendar/anywhere tools overlap in flight-price discovery, which can cause misselection.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming conventions are mixed across the set: plain underscores (airports_search), vendor-prefixed underscores (ferryhopper_get_ports), redundant prefixes (skiplagged_sk_hotels_search, trivago_trivago-accommodation-search), and hyphenated sub-APIs (tourradar_b2b-tour-details, tourradar_vertex-tour-search). There is no consistent verb_noun pattern and at least one version-suffixed deprecated name.

Tool Count1/5

With 56 tools, the server falls into the extreme-mismatch count band. The breadth is partly explained by eight vendor integrations, but many lookups, near-duplicate searches, and deprecated tools could be consolidated or split into focused MCP servers.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers most of the travel-planning lifecycle: airports, airlines, visa rules, FCDO advice, flights, hotels, cars, ferries, experiences, and tours including search, details, and tour booking. The main gaps are that only tours have an actual booking flow and there is no update/cancel or post-booking management.

Resources