Hit The Road Rentals
Server Details
Search motorhomes, RVs and campervans worldwide. Get instant results from 300+ rental companies across AU, NZ, US, CA, UK and more. No auth required.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: list_locations is for discovering valid city names, while search_campervans is for performing rental searches. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case naming (list_locations, search_campervans). The naming is predictable and readable throughout.
With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a rental service domain. While the tools cover initial discovery and search, there are likely missing operations like booking, managing reservations, or viewing rental details that would be expected.
The toolset is severely incomplete for a rental service. It lacks core operations such as booking a campervan, viewing rental details, managing bookings, or handling payments. Agents will hit dead ends after the initial search phase.
Available Tools
2 toolslist_locationsARead-onlyInspect
List all searchable pickup cities by country. Call this to find valid city names before searching.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| country | No | Country code filter (e.g. AU, NZ, US). Omit to return all supported countries. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the tool's purpose and usage context but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication requirements, response format, or pagination. The description doesn't contradict any 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?
Two sentences, zero waste. First sentence states purpose, second provides usage guidance. Perfectly front-loaded with essential information.
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?
For a simple read-only tool with 1 parameter and 100% schema coverage, the description provides adequate context about purpose and usage. However, without annotations or output schema, it could benefit from mentioning response format or data structure.
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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the tool's purpose in relation to the parameter - that it returns 'searchable pickup cities' which provides context for what the 'country' parameter filters. However, it doesn't add specific format details beyond what the schema provides.
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 verb 'List' and the resource 'searchable pickup cities by country', specifying it's for finding valid city names before searching. It distinguishes from the sibling 'search_campervans' by focusing on location metadata rather than vehicle search.
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?
Explicitly states 'Call this to find valid city names before searching', providing clear when-to-use guidance. It positions this as a prerequisite tool for the sibling search_campervans, though it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_campervansARead-onlyInspect
Search campervan and motorhome rentals. Returns a URL that pre-fills the search form with your trip details. Click Search on the page to see live results with pricing, availability, and booking options from 160+ rental companies.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| city | Yes | Pickup city name, e.g. "Sydney", "Auckland", "Los Angeles". Required. | |
| country | Yes | Country code: AU, NZ, US, CA, GB, DE, FR, IT, ES, NL. Required. | |
| pickup_date | Yes | Pickup date YYYY-MM-DD. Required. | |
| dropoff_city | No | Return city if different from pickup (one-way). Optional. | |
| dropoff_date | Yes | Return date YYYY-MM-DD. Required. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns a URL requiring manual interaction ('Click Search'), which is valuable behavioral context. However, it omits details like rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling, leaving gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.
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 concise and front-loaded, with two sentences that efficiently convey the tool's purpose and output. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it easy to parse.
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?
For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides basic purpose and behavioral context (URL return with manual step). However, it lacks details on error cases, response format beyond 'URL', or integration with sibling tools, leaving room for improvement given the complexity.
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 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying the parameters are used to 'pre-fill the search form', which is minimal value over the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 searches for campervan rentals and returns a pre-filled URL, distinguishing it from the sibling 'list_locations' which likely lists locations rather than performing searches. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with the sibling tool.
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 usage for finding rental options with trip details, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus 'list_locations' or any alternatives. It mentions the tool's scope (160+ companies) but lacks clear when/when-not instructions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!