Skip to main content
Glama

lilo Vacation Rentals

by io.github.lilo-property

ask_vacation_rental_question

Read-only

Ask a natural language question about a vacation rental property and get an answer grounded in verified data. Examples: 'What is the WiFi password?', 'Where do I park?', 'Is there a dishwasher?', 'What time is check-out?'. Requires property_id and the question text.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
guest_idNoOptional: Guest ID for vetting verification
questionYesNatural language question (e.g., 'What's the WiFi password?', 'Where do I park?')
property_idYesProperty UUID or lilo_code

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds 'grounded in verified data,' which is a useful behavioral trait, but it does not disclose limitations such as unanswered questions, data coverage, or response format. With annotations present, the added context is minimal but not trivial.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and immediately followed by useful, concrete examples. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 simple read-only Q&A tool with complete schema and annotations, the description is largely sufficient. It clearly conveys what the tool does and gives examples. It does not describe the return value structure (no output schema), but 'get an answer' plus examples provides adequate context for an agent to invoke it 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 description coverage is 100%, with each parameter (property_id, question, guest_id) already described. The description provides example questions that clarify the expected format of the 'question' parameter but adds no significant semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the verb 'ask' and resource 'vacation rental property', with the outcome 'get an answer grounded in verified data'. Concrete examples (WiFi password, parking, dishwasher, check-out) illustrate the scope, distinguishing it from sibling tools that fetch specific datasets like FAQs or house rules.

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?

The description implies usage for any natural language question about a vacation rental but does not explicitly address when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_vacation_rental_faqs or get_vacation_rental_house_rules. It mentions required inputs (property_id and question) but offers no exclusions or preference guidance.

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

All lilo Vacation Rentals toolsInspect
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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

There is significant overlap and redundancy among tools, causing ambiguity. For example, analyze_booking_threat_risk, analyze_guest_communication_risk, and analyze_guest_interaction_risk are aliases or near-duplicates, and multiple tools like get_vacation_rental_details and fetch_vacation_rental_details appear to serve the same purpose. This makes it difficult for an agent to choose the correct tool without confusion.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., check_vacation_rental_availability_and_pricing, get_vacation_rental_details), which aids readability. However, there are minor deviations, such as some tools using 'analyze' vs. 'assess' or 'detect' for similar risk functions, and a few tools like 'ingest_philadelphia_public_records' use a different verb style, but overall the naming is largely predictable.

Tool Count2/5

With 67 tools, the count is excessive for a vacation rental server, leading to bloat and potential overwhelm. Many tools could be consolidated (e.g., multiple risk analysis tools, duplicate property detail fetchers), and the scope feels unfocused, including niche tools like those for Philadelphia events or World Cup compliance that might be better handled as parameters in broader tools.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides comprehensive coverage for the vacation rental domain, including booking, risk assessment, compliance, maintenance, evidence management, and guest interactions. There are no obvious gaps; it supports full CRUD/lifecycle operations and specialized workflows, ensuring agents can handle most scenarios without dead ends.

Resources