Get comprehensive list of all facilities and amenities for a specific room, including WiFi metrics (download/upload speed, jitter). Returns room details, all facilities, and network performance data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| roomId | Yes | The unique identifier of the room (tbStaysRoom.EntryID) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / properties / roomId / descriptionPrevious value: -"The unique identifier of the room"New value: +"The unique identifier of the room (tbStaysRoom.EntryID)"Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, establishing the safe read-only nature. The description adds the return contents (room details, facilities, network performance), but does not disclose potential edge cases (e.g., invalid roomId, missing WiFi data) or formatting details, so it provides only modest additional behavioral context.
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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the main action and lists the expected returns. Every phrase provides useful information without redundancy, making it highly concise and efficient.
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 simplicity of the tool (one input, read-only, no output schema), the description sufficiently summarizes what the tool returns. It doesn't specify behavior for missing or invalid inputs, but for a straightforward getter this is a minor gap. The description is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's core functionality.
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?
The input schema covers 100% of the parameter (roomId) with a clear description. The tool description adds minimal value by referring to 'a specific room' but does not elaborate on parameter behavior, formats, or constraints beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.
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's purpose: to get a comprehensive list of facilities and amenities for a specific room, including WiFi metrics. It distinguishes itself from siblings like getAllAmenities (global list) and getRoomFacilityOptions (options) by specifying 'for a specific room' and including unique data like jitter.
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 when to use this tool: when you need detailed amenities for a specific room, indicated by 'for a specific room'. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough to infer the intended use case, though it could benefit from a direct comparison with similar tools.
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 clearly distinct purposes, with detailed descriptions differentiating the many getStaysBy* search variants and the four availability tools. However, the overlap between checkStayAvailability, getRoomAvailability, findNearestAvailability, and getAvailabilityByMonth could still cause confusion for an agent, though the descriptions largely mitigate this.
The tools mostly follow a verb-noun pattern with get*, update*, create*, and delete* dominating, but the mix of additional verbs (check, find, list, search, signup, book, quote, purchase, submit, save, reorder, upload) and inconsistent noun forms (Stay vs. Stays, MyStay vs. Stay) prevents a fully predictable naming scheme. CamelCase is consistent, but the verb variety is high.
With 76 tools, this server far exceeds the well-scoped range and even the 50+ threshold for extreme mismatch. While the platform covers multiple domains, this many tools is overwhelming for an agent and would likely be better split into focused sub-servers.
The tool surface is broad, covering search, stay management, applications, bookings, products, and help center. However, there are notable lifecycle gaps: no cancel booking, no delete stay, no delete application, and no way to update or delete a booking. These missing operations create potential dead ends for common workflows.