Skip to main content
Glama

MAQAMI Travel

by io.github.negm17111995
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Amend hotel booking

put_bookings_bookingid_amend
DestructiveIdempotent

Correct the booking holder's name, email or phone on a confirmed hotel booking, for example to fix a typo.

It does not change dates, rooms or guests. To show the customer prices for other dates or guests, use post_bookings_bookingid_alternative_prebooks.

Pass the bookingId, the email currently on the booking and the corrected holder (firstName, lastName, email, optional phone). Confirm the new details with the customer before calling.

Requires the bookingId and the email used to book: the server only returns or changes a booking when they match.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYesThe email address currently on the booking, used to verify the customer. A new email goes in holder.email.
holderYesThe corrected booking holder. Send firstName, lastName and email even if only one of them changes.
remarksNoOptional note for the amendment.
lastNameNoThe booking holder's last name, if the customer gives it. Optional.
bookingIdYesThe booking ID from the booking confirmation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed7 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Previous value: -trueNew value: +false
    • changedInput schema / properties / bookingId / description
      Previous value: -"The unique booking identifier to amend"New value: +"The booking ID from the booking confirmation."
    • changedInput schema / properties / email / description
      Previous value: -"The guest email address used during booking (required for verification)."New value: +"The email address currently on the booking, used to verify the customer. A new email goes in holder.email."
    • addedInput schema / properties / holder
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "The corrected booking holder. Send firstName, lastName and email even if only one of them changes.",
+  "properties": {
+    "email": {
+      "description": "The holder's email address.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "firstName": {
+      "description": "The holder's first name.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "lastName": {
+      "description": "The holder's last name.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "phone": {
+      "description": "The holder's phone number.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "firstName",
+    "lastName",
+    "email"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / lastName / description
      Previous value: -"The guest last name (optional alternative for verification)."New value: +"The booking holder's last name, if the customer gives it. Optional."
    • addedInput schema / properties / remarks
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional note for the amendment.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "bookingId",
-  "email"
-]New value: +[
+  "bookingId",
+  "email",
+  "holder"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare the safety profile (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true), and the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the server only changes a booking when bookingId and the original email match, and the agent should confirm new details with the customer before calling. It does not explain what 'destructive' means here (holder data is overwritten and not reversible), which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Three short, front-loaded paragraphs: scope of change, alternative tool, then how to call it. Minor redundancy in restating the bookingId/email verification requirement in two places costs it the top mark.

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 mutating tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, exclusions, alternative routing, required inputs and a pre-call confirmation step. Only the consequence of the destructive overwrite is left unspecified.

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%, so the schema already documents every parameter including the current-vs-new email distinction. The description restates the required triple (bookingId, email, holder) but adds no syntax, format or constraint detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

States a specific verb (correct), resource (booking holder's name, email or phone) and scope constraint (on a confirmed hotel booking). It explicitly names the sibling it is not (post_bookings_bookingid_alternative_prebooks), so an agent can differentiate without opening schemas.

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?

Gives the intended use case ('fix a typo'), explicit exclusions ('does not change dates, rooms or guests'), and a named alternative with the condition that selects it ('to show the customer prices for other dates or guests'). Nothing is left to inference.

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

All MAQAMI Travel toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources