Update the host account's business profile (legal business name, VAT/business registration numbers). Applies to the account owning the MCP agent token, not a specific stay. Only fields supplied are changed. Does NOT touch bank or tax-ID details — those are not MCP-writable.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| vatNumber | No | ||
| businessName | No | ||
| entityAccount | No | Whether the host operates as a registered business entity | |
| businessNumber | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds significant context beyond annotations: partial-update semantics ('Only fields supplied are changed'), account-level scope, and non-writable fields (bank/tax-ID). No contradiction 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Four concise sentences, each delivering critical information: main purpose, scope, update semantics, and exclusions. Information is front-loaded, with no filler or repetition of schema/annotations.
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?
Comprehensive for a 4-parameter update tool with no output schema. It covers scope, partial updates, and field restrictions. Missing details like empty-update behavior or validation rules, but those are less critical and not hinted at by the schema or annotations.
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?
Schema coverage is only 25% (only entityAccount has a description). The tool description adds group-level meaning by mapping 'legal business name, VAT/business registration numbers' to businessName, vatNumber, and businessNumber. It does not detail each parameter's constraints or valid combinations, but partially compensates for the low 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 action ('Update the host account's business profile') and specifies the exact fields involved ('legal business name, VAT/business registration numbers'). It explicitly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools by noting it applies to the account owning the MCP agent token, not a specific stay, which differentiates it from the updateStay* tools.
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?
Provides clear context on scope ('account owning the MCP agent token, not a specific stay') and behavior ('Only fields supplied are changed'), plus an explicit exclusion ('Does NOT touch bank or tax-ID details'). While it doesn't name alternative tools, the scope and exclusions effectively guide when to use this tool.
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.
