Save hours every week. This travel itinerary planner toolkit gives you a battle-tested prompt and operating playbook for restaurant/brand growth. No setup, works in any LLM chatbot.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | No | Optional user query to scope the analysis. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only offers sales claims ('save hours', 'no setup') and never describes what the tool actually returns, does, or requires.
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?
Three short sentences, but they are pure promotional filler with zero functional content. Brevity here comes from saying nothing rather than from being well-targeted.
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?
Even for a simple one-parameter tool, the description never establishes what the tool produces, and its stated subject (restaurant/brand growth) conflicts with its name (travel itinerary). An agent has no basis to invoke it 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?
There is a single optional 'query' parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already explains it. The description adds no meaning about how the query scopes the analysis, so baseline 3 applies.
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 name says travel itinerary planner, but the description immediately pivots to a 'restaurant/brand growth' prompt and operating playbook. An agent cannot tell whether this tool produces travel itineraries or brand-growth copy, and the domain mismatch is actively misleading.
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?
No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, no alternatives named among the many sibling planners (trip-planner-pro, family-trip-planner, weekend-route-planner). 'Works in any LLM chatbot' is marketing, not usage guidance.
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.