Realtime package holiday and charter flight prices from Finland. Inventory not on Google Flights.
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Average 3.3/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools are clearly distinct: one searches for flights only, the other for package holidays. There is no overlap in their purposes, making selection straightforward.
Both tool names follow the same verb_noun pattern with the prefix 'search_' and a specific object (flights/holidays). This is perfectly consistent.
With only 2 tools, the server feels thin, especially for a 'travel search' domain that could reasonably include more search types (e.g., hotels, cars). However, for a narrowly scoped server focusing on flights and package holidays, the count is not entirely inappropriate; it's borderline.
For a server whose stated purpose is travel search, having both flight and package holiday search covers the core domain. Minor gaps like missing hotel-only search or detailed result retrieval are workable, but the surface is not severely incomplete.
search_flightsEtsi lentotarjouksia SuomestaBInspectNDC-yhteensopiva API lentojen (vain lennot) hakuun Suomesta. Tietokanta sisältää tilauslentojen paikkoja, joita ei yleensä löydy Google Flightsista, Skyscanneristä tai Kayakista. Etsi parhaat saatavilla olevat lentotarjoukset hakukriteerien perusteella.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| adt | No | Aikuisten määrä (NDC: PaxType=ADT), oletus 1 | |
| chd | No | Lasten määrä (NDC: PaxType=CHD), oletus 0 | |
| inf | No | Vauvojen määrä (NDC: PaxType=INF), oletus 0 | |
| dest | No | IATA-koodi kohdekentälle, esim. AYT, AGP, TFS | |
| orig | No | IATA-koodi lähtökentälle, esim. HEL, OUL, TLL | |
| sort | No | Järjestys, oletus price_asc | price_asc |
| limit | No | Tarjousten määrä (1-25), oletus 10 | |
| direct | No | Vain suorat lennot (NDC: StopQuantity=0) | |
| dep_date | No | Tarkka lähtöpäivä (YYYY-MM-DD) | |
| ret_date | No | Tarkka paluupäivä (YYYY-MM-DD) | |
| max_price | No | Maksimihinta (NDC: PriceRangeFilter.MaxAmount) | |
| nights_max | No | Enimmäismäärä öitä (vendor extension, ei NDC) | |
| nights_min | No | Vähimmäismäärä öitä (vendor extension, ei NDC) | |
| dep_date_to | No | Viimeisin lähtöpäivä (YYYY-MM-DD) | |
| ret_date_to | No | Viimeisin paluupäivä (YYYY-MM-DD) | |
| dep_date_from | No | Aikaisin lähtöpäivä (YYYY-MM-DD) | |
| ret_date_from | No | Aikaisin paluupäivä (YYYY-MM-DD) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions NDC compatibility and unique charter deals but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as destructive potential, authentication needs, rate limits, or return value structure. For a search tool, the lack of output format info is a gap.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single paragraph of three sentences, front-loading the core function. It is efficient, though the second sentence about charter deals could be slightly more concise.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has 17 parameters and no output schema or annotations. The description is too brief to cover usage context, parameter interplay (e.g., dep_date vs dep_date_from/to), return format, or error handling. A more detailed description is needed for such a complex tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema; it only contextualizes the tool as NDC-based. Each parameter has inline descriptions, so the schema already provides adequate semantics.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool searches for flights only (vain lennot) from Finland, and distinguishes it from typical flight search engines by including charter seats. The sibling tool search_holidays likely covers packages, so purpose is specific and differentiated.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling search_holidays. It does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it. The user must infer from the tool name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_holidaysEtsi äkkilähtöjä ja pakettimatkoja SuomestaBInspectAPI hakuun suurimmasta ja kattavimmasta tietokannasta Suomessa pakettimatkojen tarjouksista. API:ta käytetään antamaan parhaat tarjoukset pakettimatkoista, jotka tarjoavat Tjäreborg, TUI, Apollo, Nazar, Ticket ja monet muut. Etsi parhaat saatavilla olevat pakettimatkat Suomesta hakukriteerien perusteella.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lat | No | Leveysasteikko desimaaliluvuissa, käytetään lon ja säteen kanssa | |
| lon | No | Pituusasteikko desimaaliluvuissa, käytetään lat ja säteen kanssa | |
| bbox | No | Maantieteellinen haku rajoitettu suorakulmiolla. Muoto: minLat,minLon,maxLat,maxLon. | |
| sort | No | Tarjousten järjestys. Oletus on price_asc | |
| limit | No | Tarjottavien määrä, esimerkiksi 5, 10. Oletus 1 | |
| adults | No | Aikuisten määrä 12-99 vuotta, oletus 2 | |
| fields | No | Kentät, jotka on sisällytettävä hakutuloksiin | |
| radius | No | Säde kilometreinä lat, lon | |
| rating | No | Vähimmäismäärä tähtiä, esimerkiksi 3, 4, 5 | |
| infants | No | Vauvojen määrä 0-1 vuotta, oletus 0 | |
| category | No | Loman kategoria SUNBATH=Aurinko ja uiminen, CITY=Kaupunkiloma, SKI=Hiihtoloma, EXOTIC=Eksoottinen | |
| children | No | Lasten määrä 2-11 vuotta, oletus 0 | |
| days_max | No | Maksimimäärä päiviä lomalle, esimerkiksi 3, 7, 14 | |
| days_min | No | Vähimmäismäärä päiviä lomalle, esimerkiksi 3, 7, 14 | |
| features | No | Hotellin mukavuudet: ac=ilmastointi, adultsonly=Vain aikuisille, apartment=huoneisto, bar=baari, childspool=lastenallas, gym=kuntosali, heatedpool=lämmitetty uima-allas, kidsclub=lastenkerho, pool=uima-allas, seaview=merinäköala, restaurant=ravintola, spa=kylpylä | |
| max_price | No | Maksimihinta koko matkalle, esimerkiksi 5000, 10000, 15000 | |
| board_type | No | Ateriat sisältyvät hotelliin, esimerkiksi aamiainen, puolihoito, täysihoito, all inclusive | |
| hotel_name | No | Hotellin nimi, esimerkiksi Riu Palace, Iberostar, Sol | |
| temp_water | No | Vähimmäisodotettu veden lämpötila Celsius-asteina, esimerkiksi 20, 25 | |
| country_iso | No | ISO-koodi maa, esimerkiksi ES, GR, PL, TR | |
| guest_rating | No | Vähimmäisarvio, esimerkiksi 8.2, 9.0. Mediaani: 8.4 | |
| direct_flight | No | Aseta true löytääksesi hotelleja suorilla lennoilla | |
| distance_beach | No | Maksimaalinen etäisyys rannalle metreinä, esimerkiksi 0, 100, 500 | |
| depart_date_max | No | Viimeisin mahdollinen loma-ajan alkamispäivä (ISO 8601 format YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ) | |
| depart_date_min | No | Aikaisin mahdollinen loma-ajan alkamispäivä (ISO 8601 format YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ) | |
| distance_centre | No | Maksimaalinen etäisyys keskustaan metreinä, esimerkiksi 0, 100, 500 | |
| return_date_max | No | Viimeisin mahdollinen kotiinpaluupäivä (ISO 8601 format YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ) | |
| return_date_min | No | Aikaisin mahdollinen kotiinpaluupäivä (ISO 8601 format YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ) | |
| destination_name | No | Kohdenimi, esimerkiksi Malta, Magaluf, Gran Canaria | |
| distance_airport | No | Maksimaalinen etäisyys hotellin ja lentokentän välillä km, esimerkiksi 20, 40, 80 | |
| number_of_nights | No | Tarkka määrä öitä lomalle, esimerkiksi 3, 7, 14 | |
| temp_air_day_max | No | Maksimiodotettu päivälämpötila Celsius-asteina, esimerkiksi 25, 30 | |
| temp_air_day_min | No | Vähimmäisodotettu päivälämpötila Celsius-asteina, esimerkiksi 20, 25 | |
| depart_date_exact | No | Loman on alkaa tänä päivänä (ISO 8601 format YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ) | |
| return_date_exact | No | Kotiinpaluupäivä alkaa tänä päivänä (ISO 8601 format YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ) | |
| origin_airport_code | No | IATA-koodi lähtöpaikalle, esimerkiksi HEL, OUL, TLL | |
| destination_airport_code | No | IATA-koodi määränpää lentokentälle, esimerkiksi ALC, AGP, TFS |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only mentions that the API provides offers from a database. It does not describe the return format, whether the operation is read-only, or critical behaviors like the default limit of 1 result. The description is too vague about what the tool actually does beyond searching.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is exactly two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no fluff or redundant information. It is appropriately concise given the tool's complexity, avoiding unnecessary detail while still conveying what the tool does.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the high parameter count (37), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse to be complete. It does not explain key contextual aspects such as how location parameters (lat/lon/radius vs bbox) work, how filters combine, or what the response structure looks like. The default limit of 1 result is a critical behavior only documented in the schema, not the description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what is already in the schema; it merely mentions 'search criteria' generically, so no additional value is provided for understanding individual parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description explicitly states this is an API search for the largest and most comprehensive database of package tour offers in Finland, and that it finds the best available package tours based on search criteria. This clearly differentiates it from the sibling tool search_flights, as it focuses on package holidays rather than flights alone.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage through 'Etsi parhaat saatavilla olevat pakettimatkat' but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus search_flights or any other alternative. There are no exclusions or when-not-to-use indications, only an implied context of package tour searches from Finland.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!