Skip to main content
Glama

Nomad Stays

by io.github.nomadstays

submitStayApplication

Submit a completed Stay Application for human review. Rejects with a missingFields list if any required field is still empty, or a 409 if the Application Fee hasn't been paid/waived yet (call purchaseProduct with productId 8 and applicationId first). There is no partial/optimistic submission — everything required must already be in place. On success the application moves to human review; nothing further is needed from the agent. Requires NOMADSTAYS_MCP_AGENT_TOKEN.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
applicationIdYesThe application's ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses two failure modes (missingFields list and 409 on unpaid fee), the no-partial-submission policy, the success outcome (moves to human review, nothing further needed), and the auth token requirement. This adds rich behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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?

Every sentence serves a purpose: action, error modes, prerequisite, success/next-step, auth. It's compact, front-loaded with the main verb, and contains zero 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?

With no output schema, the description adequately covers the outcome ('application moves to human review; nothing further is needed') and all failure paths. It omits the exact success response format, but for a one-parameter submit action the operational behavior is sufficiently complete.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% for applicationId, which is already described as 'The application's ID'. The description adds important state context: the ID must correspond to an application that is complete and for which the fee has been paid/waived. This is meaningful beyond the schema's type-level description.

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 'Submit a completed Stay Application for human review' – a specific verb+resource that clearly distinguishes it from saveStayApplication and other submit tools by naming the exact resource. It also clarifies the finality of the action.

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 explicitly states prerequisites: all required fields must be non-empty and the Application Fee must be paid/waived. It gives an explicit alternative (call purchaseProduct) for the unpaid-fee case and notes there is no partial/optimistic submission. However, it doesn't explicitly name saveStayApplication as the alternative for incomplete applications, though the missingFields rejection implies it.

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

All Nomad Stays 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

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.

Naming Consistency3/5

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.

Tool Count1/5

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.

Completeness3/5

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.

Resources