Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SkyAccess

by com.skyaccess
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get the booking link for an empty leg flight

booking_handoff
Read-onlyIdempotent

Return the public SkyAccess listing page link for a specific empty leg flight, where the traveler can review the flight and continue on skyaccess.com. This is read-only: it creates no booking, hold or payment, and it does not modify or cancel anything. It sends no traveler details to SkyAccess and does not ask a specialist to make contact. If an operator cancels a paid booking, SkyAccess notifies the customer and a specialist starts sourcing a replacement aircraft on the same route; if nothing suits, the customer chooses a full refund or flight credit. Human support is available 24/7 at +1 424-374-3411.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "flightId": "<flightId>"
    },
    "name": "booking_handoff"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
flightIdYesThe SkyAccess empty leg flight id, as given in the `flightId` field of a flight listing

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / flightId / description
      Previous value: -"The flight id returned in the `flightId` field of a search_empty_legs result"New value: +"The SkyAccess empty leg flight id, as given in the `flightId` field of a flight listing"
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so restating 'read-only' adds little. The genuinely additive disclosure is that no traveler details are sent to SkyAccess and no specialist contact is triggered; the trailing cancellation/refund policy and support phone number are unrelated to this tool's behavior.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The first two sentences are well front-loaded and earn their place, but the final two sentences about operator cancellations, refunds/credits, and a 24/7 phone number are off-topic filler for a read-only link generator and dilute the signal.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a one-parameter read-only tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the core is sufficient: it returns a public listing link where the traveler continues on skyaccess.com. It stops short of saying whether the link expires or is single-use, and the unrelated policy text occupies space that could have covered that.

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 100% and the single flightId parameter is documented in the schema as coming from a flight listing's flightId field. The description adds no format, sourcing, or validity-window detail beyond that, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Names a specific verb+resource ('Return the public SkyAccess listing page link for a specific empty leg flight'), so the agent knows exactly what it produces. The 'creates no booking' framing implicitly separates it from request_booking, but no sibling is named outright.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage context is implied through negation ('creates no booking, hold or payment... does not ask a specialist to make contact'), which hints that booking/contact flows live elsewhere. However, no sibling tool is named and no explicit 'use this when / use request_booking instead when' routing rule is stated.

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

All SkyAccess toolsInspect
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