Skip to main content
Glama

Duffel

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Duffel Flight Search

duffel_flight_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search flights (with pricing) from to on — returns the 5 cheapest real, bookable offers from the Duffel Flights API, each with total price, airline, and per-segment flight numbers/times. Pass return_date for a round trip. This is REAL flight inventory: use a Duffel test token (duffel_test_...) for sandbox results. Example: duffel_flight_search({ origin: "JFK", destination: "LHR", departure_date: "2026-08-15", passengers: 2, cabin_class: "economy", apiKey: "duffel_test..." })

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
originYesOrigin airport IATA code, e.g. "JFK"
_apiKeyYesYour Duffel access token (from duffel.com). A test token "duffel_test_..." works against the sandbox.
passengersNoNumber of adult passengers (default 1, max 9)
cabin_classNoOptional cabin: economy, premium_economy, business, or first
destinationYesDestination airport IATA code, e.g. "LHR"
return_dateNoOptional return date (YYYY-MM-DD). If given, searches a round trip (destination back to origin on this date).
departure_dateYesOutbound date in YYYY-MM-DD format, e.g. "2026-08-15"

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate a safe, idempotent read operation (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint). The description adds value by specifying that the tool returns exactly the 5 cheapest offers from the Duffel Flights API, that it uses real inventory accessible via a token, and that a test token works for sandbox. 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact yet comprehensive: a single sentence conveys the main action, then key details about the result, and a concrete example. Every sentence is necessary and well-structured. The front-loading of the purpose is effective.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite no output schema, the description thoroughly explains what the tool returns (total price, airline, per-segment flight numbers/times) and that it returns 5 cheapest offers. All 7 parameters are documented in the schema, and the description clarifies the real-world data source. The example demonstrates usage with typical parameters.

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%, and the schema already explains all parameters clearly. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, except for the example showing a full invocation. Baseline is 3 for high coverage; the example slightly raises value but not enough for a 4.

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 clearly states it searches flights with pricing, specifying the return of the 5 cheapest real offers along with total price, airline, per-segment flight details. The verb 'Search' combined with the resource 'flights' and scope definition ('real, bookable') makes the tool's purpose unmistakable. No sibling tool competes for this functionality.

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 says when to use (to find real flight inventory) and includes an example with a test token for sandbox usage. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the sibling list contains no similar tools, so the context is sufficient. The mention of real vs sandbox data provides clear context for testing.

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

All Duffel 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
Disambiguation3/5

The set is organized into clusters (Pipeworx querying, Polymarket analysis, entity research, subscriptions, memory), but several tools within a cluster have heavily overlapping purposes: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, deep_research, and validate_claim all answer questions, and polymarket_edges, bet_research, and polymarket_arbitrage all surface trading opportunities. The very detailed descriptions help an agent choose correctly, but the boundaries are not crisp enough for a 4.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most names are lowercase snake_case and there are consistent prefixes like polymarket_ and pipeworx_, which aids predictability. However, the verb/noun ordering is inconsistent across the set (ask_pipeworx, bet_research, entity_profile, duffel_flight_search, ai_visibility_check), and some names are noun-heavy while others are verb-first. It is readable but not a uniform convention.

Tool Count2/5

At 32 tools the surface feels heavy for a coherent server; the rubric treats 25+ as too many. Several tools are wrappers or variants of the same underlying capability (ask_pipeworx_beta, polymarket_edges vs bet_research, ai_visibility_check vs scan_competitor_ai_presence), so the count overstates real functional breadth.

Completeness3/5

The research/data side is very complete: querying, grounded verification, deep research, entity resolution, comparison, profiles, monitoring, memory, and feedback are all covered. However, the Duffel flight tool only searches and never books, so if the server is meant to be a flight agent there is a notable dead end; the broader toolkit also lacks direct CRUD for most resources beyond subscriptions.

Resources