get_my_preferencesGet your saved room preferences, standing requests, and loyalty accounts on Roomza. Requires connecting your Roomza account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| found | Yes | ||
| preferences | Yes | ||
| travelCards | Yes | ||
| loyaltyPrograms | Yes | ||
| standingRequests | Yes |
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 already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds a behavioral precondition (requires account connection), which is valuable 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence captures the action and scope; the second adds a critical prerequisite. Efficient and front-loaded.
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 tool has no parameters, an output schema (not shown but exists), and annotations cover safety, the description is complete. It explains the purpose, scope, and prerequisite, which is sufficient for an agent to decide when to call it.
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?
There are zero parameters, and schema coverage is trivially 100%. The baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, and the description adds no conflicting or redundant parameter information.
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 verb 'Get' and the specific resources ('saved room preferences, standing requests, and loyalty accounts') on Roomza, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_special_request or get_hotel. The scope is well-defined.
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 purpose is clear and a prerequisite (account connection) is stated, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_special_request. An agent can infer the usage context from the name and description, but explicit when/when-not guidance is missing.
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.
Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose: searching, retrieving details, pricing, rooms, reviews, nearby places, user-specific actions (preferences, trips), booking, and presentation. The overlap between get_hotel and ask_about_hotel is intentional and clearly differentiated (ask is for supplementary questions), and get_hotel_rooms vs show_rooms are also distinct (list vs present).
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: get_hotel, get_hotel_pricing, get_hotel_rooms, get_my_preferences, get_my_trips, get_nearby, get_recent_reviews, search_hotels, secure_room, show_rooms, add_special_request, ask_about_hotel. The only minor variation is 'ask_about_hotel' but it's still verb-based and follows the same structure.
Twelve tools is well within the optimal range for a domain of this scope. The toolset covers the core lifecycle (search, view, price, book, add request, view trips) plus supporting functions (reviews, nearby, user preferences, presentation). No redundant or superfluous tools exist.
The toolset covers the primary hotel intelligence and booking workflow thoroughly: search, detail, pricing, rooms, booking, special requests, and user data. Slight gap: no explicit cancellation or booking modification tool, but given the server's focus on intelligence and presentation, this is a minor omission that agents can work around.