World Airfares Flight Search

get_itinerary_details

Read-only

Get detailed information about a specific flight itinerary. Returns comprehensive details including:

Complete flight segments with airline, flight number, times, and aircraft type
Departure and arrival terminals (if available)
Baggage allowance (checked bags, carry-on, personal item limits)
Layover information (duration, airport, overnight status)
Fare rules (refundability, change policy, fees)
Price breakdown (base fare, taxes, fees)
Booking URL for purchase

Use this when user asks for:

'Tell me more about this flight'
'What are the baggage allowances?'
'Is this flight refundable?'
'Show me the layover details'
'What terminals will I use?'

WIDGET NOTE: If this tool's results are displayed in a visual widget alongside your response, do NOT repeat the itinerary details in text format. Instead, briefly confirm the details are shown. Do NOT prompt users with instructions like 'say show details for RefNo X' — the widget already displays the details interactively. Only use the formatting instructions below when NO visual widget is rendering the results.

PRESENTATION FORMATTING (MANDATORY):

Present detailed information in well-formatted sections. Group by flight leg, segment, and then rules/baggage.
CRITICAL: ALWAYS display full names with codes for better readability:
- Airports: Use format 'City Name (CODE)' - Example: 'Colombo (CMB)', 'London Heathrow (LHR)', 'Dubai (DXB)'
- Airlines: Use format 'Airline Name (CODE)' - Example: 'Emirates (EK)', 'British Airways (BA)', 'Flydubai (FZ)'
- NEVER display codes alone (CMB, DXB, EK, etc.) - users don't recognize them
- ALWAYS include both the full name and code in parentheses

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`searchId`	Yes	The searchId from a previous flight search response (found in the 'searchId' field of the JSON response). Used to retrieve cached search results.
`itineraryId`	Yes	The itineraryId of the specific flight offer to get details for (found in the 'itineraryId' field of each flight offer in the search results, also displayed as 'RefNo' in result tables).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`legs`	Yes
`airline`	Yes
`bookingUrl`	Yes
`cabinClass`	Yes
`passengers`	Yes
`airlineCode`	Yes
`itineraryId`	Yes
`priceBreakdown`	Yes
`baggageAllowance`	No

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/destructiveHint annotations, the description discloses the widget integration behavior, mandatory presentation formatting (full airport/airline names with codes), and the full scope of returned content. This is rich behavioral context that annotations alone don't convey.

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 long but well-structured with bullet points and clear sections. Each part (return content, use cases, widget note, formatting rules) serves a distinct purpose. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, and though verbose, the formatting rules are essential for correct output.

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?

With an output schema present, the description still goes beyond by listing expected fields, providing user-intent examples, widget behavior, and formatting requirements. It is fully self-contained for an AI agent to invoke and present results correctly.

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% and both parameters have thorough descriptions. The tool description adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it hits the baseline of 3.

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 opens with a clear, specific statement: 'Get detailed information about a specific flight itinerary.' It lists exactly what details are returned, and differentiates from siblings (search_flights finds flights, get_more_results fetches the next page, while get_itinerary_details dives into one offer).

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?

Provides explicit 'Use this when user asks for' with concrete example queries, making the trigger conditions unmistakable. It also includes a widget note clarifying when not to repeat details in text, which is a form of 'when not to' guidance.

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

All World Airfares Flight Search 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

Each tool has a distinct phase of interaction: search_flights initiates a search, get_more_results paginates or filters cached results, and get_itinerary_details provides detailed information for a specific flight. No overlap in purpose or expected output.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case pattern with an action prefix: search_flights, get_more_results, get_itinerary_details. The verbs (search, get) are clear and appropriate to their functions, and the naming style is uniform.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools is well-scoped for a flight search server: search, pagination, and details. Each tool earns its place without redundancy, and the count falls within the ideal 3-15 range.

Completeness4/5

The set covers the core workflow: search, view more results, and inspect itinerary details. A minor gap is the lack of a direct booking tool, but booking URLs are provided within results, so agents can still complete the core user journey.

Resources

Need Help?