Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

hotels_autocomplete

Fetch Hotels.com autocomplete suggestions for partial destination or property names, returning matched locations, coordinates, and region or property IDs.

Instructions

Get Hotels.com destination suggestions. Returns Hotels.com search-box suggestions for a partial destination or property name in q (up to 120 characters). Each suggestion has its type, primary and secondary text, full location name, coordinates, and region or property id. A query with no match returns an empty suggestions list.

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": {
      "q": "<q>"
    },
    "name": "hotels_autocomplete"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesPartial destination or property name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.16.2

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations the description carries the full burden, and it does well: it is a read-only suggestion lookup, it enumerates the returned fields (type, primary/secondary text, full location name, coordinates, region/property id), and it proactively discloses the empty-`suggestions` behavior for no-match queries. It omits auth/rate-limit context, so not a 5.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then return shape, then the no-match edge case. No filler, no repetition of structured fields.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, so the description correctly compensates by describing the suggestion fields and the empty-result case. It is complete for a one-param autocomplete tool, with only minor gaps around downstream usage.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single `q` parameter, so the baseline is 3; however the description adds a real constraint not present in the schema — the 120-character maximum length — plus a concrete statement of what the value represents.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get Hotels.com destination suggestions') and clarifies it returns search-box suggestions for a partial destination/property name, which distinguishes it from the sibling hotels_search. It does not explicitly name the sibling anchor tools (hotels_search, hotels_property) it should be chained with, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by 'partial destination or property name' and the autocomplete framing, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus hotels_search, nor any mention of chaining/typing use cases. No exclusions or alternatives are given.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools