HemmaBo

Verify Vacation Rental Node

vrp_verify_node

Read-only

Verify a vacation-rental host domain is a valid Vacation Rental Protocol node before trusting it by reading its .well-known/vacation-rental.json and JWKS.

Instructions

Verify that a vacation-rental host domain is a valid Vacation Rental Protocol (VRP) node before trusting it. Reads the domain's .well-known/vacation-rental.json and JWKS. Read-only trust check: no availability, pricing, booking, or payment — do NOT use it to answer those questions. Use when a host domain arrives from outside search (user-typed or third-party); domains returned by hemmabo_search_properties can go straight to vrp_get_verified_stay_offer. On success, call vrp_get_verified_stay_offer with the same domain and stay dates. The single input is the host domain as a bare hostname (no scheme or path); public domains only — IPs, ports, and local/private hostnames are refused. Pass the node's canonical domain exactly — www and apex are distinct identities, and verification fails when the domain's declared canonical_domain differs from the one you passed. Verification reads that domain's own .well-known and JWKS, so the result is only as trustworthy as the exact domain you pass. Booking and payment happen only on the host's own domain, at the signed direct_booking_url. The agent never books, pays, cancels or changes a booking.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain`	Yes	Host-owned domain without protocol or path (e.g. 'villaakerlyckan.se', 'myvilla.it'). Invalid: 'https://...', paths, ports, or booking URLs.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`error`	No	Present when verified=false or the node cannot be checked.
`domain`	Yes	Echoed canonical host domain that was checked.
`signing`	No	Summary of accepted signing algorithms, key ids, and signing-key checks.
`jwks_url`	No	Host-domain JWKS URL containing the Ed25519 public keys used to verify signed offers.
`protocol`	No	Protocol identifier discovered on the host domain. A valid node declares exactly 'vacation-rental-protocol' in its .well-known/vacation-rental.json protocol field, and that is the value returned here.
`verified`	Yes	True only when discovery, JWKS, signing metadata, and verified-offer endpoint checks pass.
`discovery_url`	No	The .well-known vacation-rental discovery URL read from the host domain.
`protocol_version`	No	VRP version declared by the host discovery document.
`verified_stay_offer_url`	No	Host-domain endpoint template or URL used to request signed verified stay offers.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv7.0.5Oct 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/destructive/openWorld, and the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: it discloses that it fetches .well-known/vacation-rental.json and JWKS, that trust is bounded by the exact domain passed, that IPs/ports/local hostnames are refused, and that booking/payment happen only on the host's own signed direct_booking_url.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and read-only scope, then sequenced into constraints and next steps. It is on the long side and the closing two sentences about booking/payment and the agent never booking are somewhat redundant, but each sentence still carries operational value.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary, and the description covers everything else an agent needs: preconditions, exact-input rules, refusal cases, and the downstream call. Complete for a single-parameter verification tool.

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% and the schema already gives the pattern and invalid examples, so baseline is 3. The description adds genuine meaning beyond it — bare hostname form, refusal of IPs/ports/private hostnames, and the critical www-vs-apex canonical-domain identity rule that causes verification to fail on mismatch.

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?

States a specific verb (verify) and resource (VRP node / host domain) and explicitly scopes it as a trust check separate from availability, pricing, booking, or payment. It names the sibling tools it routes to and from, so an agent can distinguish it without opening any 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?

Gives explicit when-to-use (host domain arriving from outside search, user-typed or third-party) and when-not-to-use (domains from hemmabo_search_properties should go straight to vrp_get_verified_stay_offer), plus the required follow-up call with the same domain and dates. Nothing is left to inference.

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

Deploy Server