Skyalo Travel Connectivity Guide

Build a travel connectivity guide

build_travel_connectivity_guide

Read-onlyIdempotent

Creates a free, provider-neutral mobile-data estimate and readiness checklist for a travel route. Use it for data budgeting, device preparation, hotspot planning, offline readiness, and connection fallback advice. It does not browse, compare, promote, recommend, price, sell, or link to products, plans, carriers, or connectivity services.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`stops`	Yes	One to eight destinations in travel order.
`locale`	No	BCP 47 language tag for the requested guide.	en
`hotspot`	No	Whether one or more travelers expect to share data by hotspot.
`travelers`	No	Travelers who need connectivity.
`usageProfile`	No	light for maps and messaging, balanced for everyday use, heavy for frequent media, or remote-work for calls and laptop work.	balanced
`deviceReadiness`	No	confirmed when eSIM support and unlocked status are known, unsure when unverified, or not-supported when the device cannot use eSIM.	unsure

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`stops`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`summary`	Yes
`limitations`	Yes
`riskSignals`	Yes
`safeFallbacks`	Yes
`questionsToConfirm`	Yes
`readinessChecklist`	Yes

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by stating the guide is free and provider-neutral, and clarifies boundaries by listing excluded activities. No contradictions, though 'creates' could be seen as slightly conflicting with readOnlyHint, but it's consistent with generating content without 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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the purpose and then list use cases and boundaries. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or wasted content.

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 tool has 6 parameters (all with schema descriptions), an output schema, and no sibling tools, the description covers all necessary context: purpose, usage scope, and boundaries. The output schema handles return values, so nothing is missing.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning to parameters beyond what is already in the schema. All parameter details are covered by the schema descriptions.

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 tool creates a mobile-data estimate and readiness checklist for a travel route. It specifies the verb 'creates' and the resource 'travel route', and distinguishes itself as free and provider-neutral. With no sibling tools, it stands alone clearly.

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?

The description explicitly lists use cases (data budgeting, device preparation, etc.) and provides a comprehensive list of what the tool does not do (browse, compare, promote, etc.). This gives clear guidance on when to use and when not to.

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

All Skyalo Travel Connectivity Guide 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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one generates a comprehensive travel connectivity guide, the other checks specific device compatibility. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (build_travel_connectivity_guide, check_esim_device_compatibility), with clear action verbs and descriptive nouns. The naming is predictable and uniform.

Tool Count3/5

With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a travel connectivity domain. While the tools are well-defined, the count is borderline low and may limit the server's utility in broader scenarios.

Completeness3/5

The tools cover guide creation and device compatibility but miss other potential aspects like network coverage analysis or roaming suggestions (though explicitly excluded). The surface is minimal but functional for its stated narrow scope.

Resources

Need Help?