Search restaurants near a hotel.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| hotel_lat | No | ||
| hotel_lon | No | ||
| session_id | Yes | ||
| hotel_index | No | ||
| hotel_code_or_name | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
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. However, it merely restates the tool's name and purpose, offering no details about side effects, required session state, output format, or how hotel proximity is determined. This is essentially tautological.
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 concise and front-loaded with no fluff, but it is under-specified for a tool with 5 parameters and no annotations. It is a single sentence that is appropriate in length only if the other tools or schema compensated, which they do not.
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 5 parameters, one required session_id, no annotations, and an output schema (not shown). The description is a single vague sentence that fails to mention how the hotel is identified, whether session_id is essential, or what kind of results are returned. This is far from complete for the tool's complexity.
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 0%, and the description provides no parameter information. The tool has 5 parameters (hotel_lat, hotel_lon, session_id, hotel_index, hotel_code_or_name) with only required session_id, yet none of this is explained, leaving the agent unable to understand how to specify which hotel.
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 states a clear action ('Search') and resource ('restaurants') with a locational context ('near a hotel'). While it distinguishes this from sibling tools like 'search_hotels' or 'search_activities_in_city', it does not specify how the hotel is identified or what 'near' means, preventing a complete differentiation.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus sibling search tools, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The description only restates the tool's basic function without hinting at session requirements or hotel identification methods.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have clear distinct purposes, though 'update_user_profile' and 'update_user_profile_from_model' serve similar functions with different input methods, which could cause confusion. Overall, the boundaries are generally clear.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case, such as 'search_hotels', 'update_stay_dates', and 'get_hotel_details'. No naming style mixing or irregularities.
With 20 tools covering hotels, homestays, flights, activities, restaurants, profile management, and session handling, the count is well-scoped for a travel assistant server. Each tool serves a distinct function without bloat.
The tool set covers core travel planning needs: search, details, offers, and profile management. However, it lacks a tool to actually confirm or book an offer, which is a noticeable gap for a complete booking flow.