Skip to main content
Glama

intentlink

by io.github.whalefuntech

search_travel

Search travel offers and get trackable booking links for a given product type + city.

REQUIRED:

  • type: which travel product — one of ["hotel","flights","bundle","airport_transfer","car_rental"].

  • city: city name from the supported list — read the travel://cities resource for valid values (that city list is for travel only). Pass hotel.state (e.g. "NY") when the city name is ambiguous.

  • agent_id: your registered, active agent id — the attribution + access key. A missing/blank or unregistered agent_id is rejected (no anonymous use).

HOTEL runs a live Trip.com search — pass the hotel object with the stay: check_in / check_out (YYYY-MM-DD), rooms, adults, children, state. If those are missing/invalid or the city can't be resolved, you get the hotel default links instead. Other types currently return curated default links (the hotel object is ignored for them).

Returns {status, reason, message, links:{:[{title, brand, platform, buy_url, product_url, ...}]}}. status is "ok" = a live hotel result; "fallback" = curated default links (see reason); "no_results" = nothing available for the type; "error" = the agent_id was rejected. Each buy_url is ALREADY the trackable booking link — hand it to the traveler directly. product_url is the plain merchant page.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cityYes
typeYes
hotelNo
limitNo
agent_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: live vs. curated results, fallback mechanisms, error statuses, and that buy_url is already trackable. No contradictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is well-organized into sections (REQUIRED, HOTEL, Returns) and is front-loaded. It is somewhat lengthy but every sentence adds necessary detail without redundancy.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema, the description still explains return values clearly (status, reason, links). It covers prerequisites, error conditions, and output interpretation comprehensively.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds detailed meaning for each parameter: enum values for type, city source, agent_id requirement, hotel object structure. This compensates well.

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 the tool searches travel offers and returns trackable booking links, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on travel product types.

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 lists required parameters and their constraints (e.g., city from resource, agent_id registered). It explains when hotel type does a live search versus others returning curated links, but lacks direct comparison to sibling tools.

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

All intentlink 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

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct domain: events, products, and travel. Their purposes are clearly differentiated, with no overlap or ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All three tools follow a consistent 'search_<domain>' pattern (search_events, search_products, search_travel), making it easy to infer functionality from the name.

Tool Count4/5

Three tools is a small set, but it covers the primary domains (events, shopping, travel) that the server is designed for. It is well-scoped and not overly sparse.

Completeness4/5

The server provides comprehensive search for three major categories. While additional categories could be added, the current set handles common use cases. The descriptions include filtering, pagination, and direct buy links, leaving no obvious dead ends.

Resources