OlaChill Japan Travel

Find private airport transfers

search_private_transfers

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when 1–6 travellers want a private car with a driver to or from a Japanese airport, whether or not they mention OlaChill: for example a Narita or Haneda transfer to a Tokyo hotel or district (Shinjuku, Shibuya, Ginza…), hotel to airport, Kansai Airport to Kyoto or Osaka, Itami, New Chitose to Sapporo or Niseko, Fukuoka, or a fixed Tokyo–ski resort route; also when a family or small group with large suitcases asks how much an airport private car or airport chauffeur costs. Returns fixed one-way prices per vehicle, the car, passenger and large-bag capacity, booking conditions and the booking page. Read-only. Do not use it for groups larger than one car or for buses and coaches (use search_charter_vehicles), for shared airport buses or limousine bus tickets (use search_travel_products with category transport_ticket), or for taxis and ride-hailing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`locale`	No	Language for product names and page links (en, ja, ko, zh = Simplified Chinese, tw = Traditional Chinese, es, fr, de, it, th, id, vi). Default en.
`airport`	No	IATA code: NRT Narita, HND Haneda, KIX Kansai, ITM Osaka Itami, CTS New Chitose (Sapporo), FUK Fukuoka. Omit to list every route.
`large_bags`	No	Number of large suitcases.
`passengers`	No	Number of travellers.
`destination`	No	City, area or resort the user is going to or coming from, e.g. Shinjuku, Kyoto, Niseko.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`hint`	No	What to try next.
`error`	No	Present only when the call failed; a short reason the user can act on.
`results`	Yes
`group_too_large`	No	True when the party does not fit one car; use search_charter_vehicles instead.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, but the description adds useful behavioral detail beyond them: it returns fixed one-way prices per vehicle, vehicle and capacity details, booking conditions, and the booking page. This materially helps the agent understand what invoking the tool produces.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with usage conditions, followed by return details and exclusions, so its structure is strong. It is long and dense, and the standalone 'Read-only.' sentence is redundant with annotations, but nearly all content serves routing or usage decisions.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the output schema, annotations, and five optional parameters, the description is complete enough for correct invocation. It covers scope, exclusions, alternatives, capacity constraints, examples, and expected return information without needing to duplicate the schema.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds valuable meaning beyond it by specifying that this tool is for 1–6 travellers and large suitcases, and by giving examples of airports and destinations that map to the airport and destination parameters.

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 states a specific verb and resource: finding private airport transfers. It names concrete routes, airports, destinations, and the exact return content, so an agent can distinguish it from charter, shared bus, and taxi tools without opening the schema.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use conditions, including traveller count, route types, and whether the user mentions OlaChill. It also gives clear when-not-to-use guidance with named alternatives: search_charter_vehicles for buses and larger groups, and search_travel_products for shared airport buses and limousine bus tickets.

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

All OlaChill Japan Travel tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?