Retrieve hotel detail summaries by property ID, including name, star rating, address, coordinates, and top amenities for Expedia Stays.
Expedia Stays property detail. Returns a hotel's detail summary (name, star rating, address/coordinates, top amenities) for a known property id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| option | Yes | Property detail payload |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Input schema / properties / option / propertiesAdded value: +{
+ "adults": {
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "check_in": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "check_out": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "currency": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "locale": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "property_id": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+}Input schema / properties / option / requiredAdded value: +[
+ "check_in",
+ "check_out",
+ "property_id"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose that the tool requires check_in and check_out dates (as per the schema) even though they are not mentioned in the description, nor does it clarify the read-only nature or any error handling. The description is minimal on behavioral details.
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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose and lists the output fields. There is no redundant information or filler, making it efficiently structured.
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?
Given the tool has a nested object with multiple parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the required date parameters, the rationale for their inclusion in a detail request, the format of the output beyond a few fields, or any error conditions. This leaves significant gaps for an agent trying to call the tool correctly.
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?
The description only mentions property_id and does not explain the purpose or necessity of the required check_in and check_out parameters, nor the optional adults, locale, or currency. Even though the schema shows these fields, the description adds no semantic value beyond what is visible in the schema, and the missing explanation of check_in/check_out could confuse an agent.
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 returns a hotel's detail summary with specific fields (name, star rating, address/coordinates, top amenities) for a known property ID. It uses a specific verb 'returns' and names the resource, distinguishing it from search tools by emphasizing the requirement of a known property ID.
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 that a property ID is needed (likely from a search tool) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like expedia_properties_search or expedia_properties_filters. It lacks guidance on when not to use it or which sibling tools to use for different needs.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.