Hotel Booking AI MCP

Search Hotels

search_hotels

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search candidate hotels by region, coordinates and radius, or fuzzy keyword.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum fuzzy hotel matches
`adults`	No	Number of adults in each room
`keyword`	No	Hotel name or location keyword when region_id and coordinates are unavailable
`children`	No	Number of children in each room
`latitude`	No	Latitude of the search center
`user_key`	No	Optional TourMind user key for authenticated ToC access
`longitude`	No	Longitude of the search center
`radius_km`	No	Search radius in kilometers
`region_id`	No	TourMind region identifier
`room_count`	No	Number of rooms using the same occupancy
`lowest_price`	No	Minimum total price filter
`check_in_date`	No	Check-in date in YYYY-MM-DD format
`children_ages`	No	Ages of the children in each room, each from 0 to 17
`highest_price`	No	Maximum total price filter
`location_name`	No	Human-readable location used to describe the search scope
`check_out_date`	No	Check-out date in YYYY-MM-DD format

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 1, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / adults / description

Previous value: -"Number of adults per room"New value: +"Number of adults in each room"

addedInput schema / properties / children

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Number of children in each room",
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / children_ages

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Ages of the children in each room, each from 0 to 17",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  "type": [
+    "null",
+    "array"
+  ]
+}

changedInput schema / properties / room_count / description

Previous value: -"Number of rooms"New value: +"Number of rooms using the same occupancy"

First observedAug 7, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint annotations already cover safety and side-effect expectations. The description adds some useful behavioral context with 'candidate hotels' and 'fuzzy keyword,' but it does not disclose much beyond what annotations and parameter descriptions already provide. There is no contradiction with 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action ('Search candidate hotels') before listing the search modes. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the high parameter count, the description is compact but adequate: the input schema fully documents each parameter, an output schema exists, and the annotations cover safety. The description supplies the key missing semantic information—the three alternative search modes and the 'candidate' nature of results. It could be slightly more explicit about valid parameter combinations, but the schema compensates.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by grouping parameters into meaningful search modes: region_id, latitude/longitude/radius_km, and keyword. This helps an agent understand how to combine otherwise independently documented parameters.

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 states a specific verb ('search'), a clear resource ('candidate hotels'), and the three supported search modes: region, coordinates/radius, and fuzzy keyword. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_hotel_detail or query_room_rates, which serve different purposes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies when to use the tool—when you need candidate hotels by location or keyword—and it names the search modes. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use this tool, such as pointing to get_hotel_detail for hotel details or query_room_rates for pricing.

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

All Hotel Booking AI MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.