Terudo partner

Quote a trip

quote_trip

Idempotent

The plans that cover a trip, with the recommended one: the cheapest covering the trip days plus a buffer day. Nothing is created.

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": {
      "destination": "<destination>",
      "start_date": "<start_date>",
      "end_date": "<end_date>"
    },
    "name": "quote_trip"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`context`	No	Optional: in one sentence, why you are calling this tool for the user. Helps Terudo improve these tools; never shown to anyone else.
`profile`	No	Data use: light (mail, maps), normal (default, plus social and music) or heavy (video, hotspot).
`end_date`	Yes	Last day, YYYY-MM-DD.
`start_date`	Yes	First day, YYYY-MM-DD.
`destination`	Yes	Destination code: ISO country code (MA, US, TR…) or a region code from destinations (EU-35…).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Useful disclosure beyond annotations: the recommendation logic is spelled out as the cheapest plan covering the trip days plus a buffer day, so the agent can explain the pick. However, 'Nothing is created' sits in mild tension with readOnlyHint=false, and nothing is said about whether the quote is cached, timed, or priced in a particular currency. The buffer-day rule is genuinely valuable context, so this is not a 1, but the ambiguity around side effects holds it to 3.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler, and the recommendation rule is front-loaded where the agent needs it. The telegraphed noun-phrase opening and the dangling 'Nothing is created' clause cost it the top score.

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 no-output-schema tool, the description does tell the agent what comes back: a set of covering plans and one recommended. With five transparently documented parameters and annotations covering safety, the only real gap is the unexplained side-effect profile flagged by readOnlyHint=false.

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 coverage is 100%, with enum values and date formats already documented, so the schema carries parameter meaning. The description adds only the trip-days-plus-buffer notion, which hints that end_date need not be extended by the caller, but never says so explicitly. 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 names the resource clearly: the plans covering a trip plus the single recommended one. An agent can infer this is a pricing/quote lookup without opening the schema. It loses a point because it is a bare noun phrase with no verb and never distinguishes itself from coverage_check or compatibility_check, which sound adjacent.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to call this rather than plans_list, coverage_check, or checkout. The trip-scoped framing implies a pre-purchase quoting step, but the agent must infer that, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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

All Terudo partner 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?