Itemised NZD total for a stay at Wanaka Haus. Validates the stay rules (minimum nights, peak-season minimum, guest cap) and checks the dates are open, before you commit to a booking.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| guests | Yes | ||
| check_in | Yes | YYYY-MM-DD | |
| check_out | Yes | YYYY-MM-DD, exclusive — the morning the guests leave |
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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses validation of stay rules and date checks, but does not mention side effects (none expected), error handling on failed validation, or idempotency. Describes core behavior but lacks full transparency.
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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary function ('Itemised NZD total'), followed by secondary validation info. Every sentence adds value with no extraneous words.
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?
No output schema, so description should explain return value. It mentions 'Itemised NZD total' but does not detail the structure (e.g., breakdown by nights, extra fees). Missing potential prerequisites like property ID (implicitly Wanaka Haus). Adequate but not fully complete.
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?
Schema description coverage is 67% (2 of 3 params have descriptions). The tool description does not add parameter-level details beyond the schema, such as the meaning of 'guests' or the date format validation behavior. Fails to compensate for the incomplete schema coverage.
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 it provides an 'Itemised NZD total for a stay at Wanaka Haus' and differentiates itself from siblings by noting it validates rules and checks availability 'before you commit to a booking.' This distinguishes it from create_booking and search_availability.
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 implies use before booking to validate stay rules and pricing. It does not explicitly exclude scenarios or mention alternatives, but the context of siblings (e.g., search_availability) creates implicit differentiation. A more explicit when-not-to-use or alternative reference would push to 5.
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 clearly distinct purpose: searching availability, getting a quote, creating a booking, checking booking status, and canceling. No overlap or ambiguity.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., search_availability, create_booking, cancel_booking), making them predictable and easy to understand.
With 5 tools covering the core booking workflow (search, quote, create, status, cancel), the count is well-scoped and appropriate for the server's purpose.
The tool surface covers the essential lifecycle of a booking: checking availability, pricing, creation, status retrieval, and cancellation. No obvious gaps for typical booking operations.