Your Next Tours

Add Trip Participant

add_trip_participant

Idempotent

Manually add a participant to a trip. Params: id (trip uuid) + body { displayName (required), email, phone }. Does NOT SEND an EMAIL (for an invite link use invite_trip_participant). Safe to retry: if the same person (same email or phone, or same name without conflicting contact details) is already on the trip, the existing participant is returned and no duplicate is created.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "add_trip_participant"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`body`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No
`email`	No
`phone`	No
`status`	No
`addedBy`	No
`joinedAt`	No	ISO 8601 timestamp
`createdAt`	No	ISO 8601 timestamp
`joinedVia`	No
`attendeeId`	No
`displayName`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 24, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / body / properties / email / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "format": "email",
-    "maxLength": 255,
-    "pattern": "^(?!\\.)(?!.*\\.\\.)([A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-\\.]*)[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@([A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "format": "email",
+    "maxLength": 255,
+    "pattern": "^(?:[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]+\\.)*[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]*[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@(?:[A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

First observedOct 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well past idempotentHint=true by spelling out the actual dedupe matching rules (same email or phone, or same name without conflicting contact details) and the resulting behavior (existing participant returned, no duplicate created). It also discloses the side-effect that no email is sent, which annotations cannot express.

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?

Three short sentences, each carrying distinct information: purpose, parameter shape, negative side effect plus alternative, and retry semantics. Front-loaded with the action and no filler.

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?

Output schema exists so return shape is covered elsewhere, and annotations carry the safety profile. For a create tool with a nested body, the description supplies the dedupe behavior, side-effect disclosure, and sibling routing that structured fields cannot, leaving no practical gap for correct invocation.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description names both parameters and marks displayName as required, which maps the shape of the body. However, it adds no format or constraint detail beyond what the schema's type/format/minLength fields already encode, so it only marginally compensates for the low coverage.

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?

Opens with a specific verb + resource ("Manually add a participant to a trip") and immediately distinguishes itself from the closely named sibling invite_trip_participant. An agent can tell what it does and what it is not without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states the exclusion ("Does NOT SEND an EMAIL") and names the alternative tool for the invite-link case. It also gives the retry condition, so the agent knows when re-calling is safe versus when it should look up an existing participant.

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

All Your Next Tours 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.

Resources

Need Help?