Terudo developer docs

Code for a Terudo Element

elements_snippet

Read-onlyIdempotent

Ready-to-paste code that mounts one Terudo Element in a page, for HTML, React, Next.js or Vue, with the trip data given. Optionally the server code for an element session (client discount, trusted email, reference, return URL).

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": {
      "element": "<element>"
    },
    "name": "elements_snippet"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`end`	No	Departure, YYYY-MM-DD.
`key`	No	A publishable key pk_live_… or pk_test_…. Default: the public demo key.
`days`	No	plans: adds daily plans of that length.
`color`	No	Brand colour, e.g. #0a5b8a.
`email`	No	Traveller email to prefill, when the page knows it.
`start`	No	Arrival, YYYY-MM-DD.
`locale`	No	fr, en, de, es, it, pt, zh, ar or hi. Default en.
`element`	Yes	Which element: booking-banner (confirmation page), trip-offer (visa approval, trip page), plans (destination page), destination-picker (shop), esim-status (customer area).
`esim_id`	No	esim-status: the order's esim.id.
`session`	No	Also give the server code creating an element session.
`framework`	No	Default html.
`return_url`	No	Where the checkout sends the traveller back.
`destination`	No	ISO country code (MA, JP) or region (EU-35).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this a safe, read-only, idempotent, closed-world operation, so the bar is lower. The description nonetheless adds meaningful behavioral context by disclosing the output shape -- ready-to-paste client code -- and that enabling the session option also yields server code for an element session involving client discount, trusted email, reference and return URL. That return-format disclosure matters because there is no output schema.

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?

Two compact sentences with the primary capability front-loaded and the optional session behavior trailing it. No filler, repetition or restating of the title.

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 13-parameter generator with no output schema, the description covers what the tool produces and the optional session variant, which is the essential information. Minor gaps remain around key requirements and any constraints on combining elements with certain params, but the schema fills those in.

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 every one of the 13 parameters is already documented in the schema, including element enum meanings, framework default, locale list and key defaults. The description only broadly gestures at 'trip data' and the session extras, adding little beyond the structured field descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description uses a specific verb and resource -- it produces 'ready-to-paste code that mounts one Terudo Element in a page' -- and names the supported frameworks (HTML, React, Next.js, Vue) plus the optional server-side session code. An agent can tell immediately this is a code-generation tool rather than a data tool. The sibling list is unrelated enough that explicit differentiation is unnecessary, keeping it just below a 5.

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 is implied rather than stated: the agent must infer it should call this when it needs embeddable element code. The phrase 'Optionally the server code for an element session' hints that the session flag triggers extra output, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisite guidance (e.g. when a publishable key is required vs. the demo key).

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

All Terudo developer docs 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?