get_my_tripsLook up your upcoming and past hotel bookings/trips on Roomza. Requires connecting your Roomza account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| past | Yes | ||
| count | Yes | ||
| upcoming | 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, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by disclosing the authentication requirement ('Requires connecting your Roomza account') and specifying the scope ('upcoming and past'). This is helpful 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?
The description is two sentences (35 words) with no redundant or vague language. Every sentence provides essential information: the action and resource, and the prerequisite. It is highly 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's simplicity (0 parameters, no nested objects, has output schema), the description is complete. It explains the tool's purpose and a key requirement. The output schema is not shown but exists, so the description does not need to detail return values. The description is sufficient for an agent to use this tool correctly.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema coverage is 100% by default. The description does not need to add parameter semantics. Per the guidelines, baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description meets this standard without needing to explain parameters.
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: 'Look up your upcoming and past hotel bookings/trips on Roomza.' It uses a specific verb ('look up') and resource ('your upcoming and past hotel bookings/trips'), and the sibling tools list shows distinct alternatives like search_hotels or get_my_preferences, making this tool's unique role unambiguous.
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 includes a prerequisite ('Requires connecting your Roomza account'), which guides usage. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., when to use get_my_trips instead of search_hotels), nor does it provide exclusions. The usage context is implied but not fully articulated.
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.