Skip to main content
Glama

lilo Vacation Rentals

by io.github.lilo-property

search_vacation_rentals_by_description

Read-only

Search for vacation rentals using a natural language description. Examples: 'romantic beachfront getaway with hot tub', 'family-friendly house with pool near Disney', 'quiet cabin in the mountains for a writers retreat'. Finds matching properties by semantic meaning, not just keywords. Pass the description as 'query'. Optional: threshold (how strict result matching should be) and limit (max results, default 10).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax results (default 10)
queryYesNatural language description of what you're looking for
thresholdNoMatch strictness (higher = stricter)

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only. The description adds the non-obvious behavior of semantic matching ('finds matching properties by semantic meaning, not just keywords') and explains the effect of threshold/limit, which is useful beyond the schema. No contradictions with annotations.

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 succinct and front-loaded with the core purpose. The three examples are valuable but could be slightly trimmed; overall every sentence contributes.

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 read-only search tool with three well-documented parameters and no output schema, this description is sufficient. It explains the semantic search behavior and parameter usage, though it could more explicitly differentiate from sibling search tools for full context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema descriptions already cover all parameters (100% coverage), the description adds concrete example queries and clarifies each parameter in plain language (e.g., 'threshold: how strict result matching should be'). This helps an agent construct better queries, but the added value is marginal.

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 'Search for vacation rentals using a natural language description,' clearly stating the action and resource. It also distinguishes itself by emphasizing 'semantic meaning, not just keywords,' which differentiates it from sibling search tools like search_vacation_rentals_by_amenities.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear context that this tool is for natural language descriptions rather than structured filters, supported by three diverse examples. It does not explicitly list alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the intent is evident.

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