Skip to main content
Glama
lumile

LumbreTravel MCP Server

by lumile

create_service_language

Add a new service language to manage multilingual content in travel programs and activities through the LumbreTravel API.

Instructions

Crear un idioma de servicio.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesNombre del idioma de servicio

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler logic for the 'create_service_language' tool, which calls the ApiService method and formats the response.
    case 'create_service_language': {
      const { name, description } = args
      const serviceLanguage = await this.apiService.createServiceLanguage({ name, description })
      return {
        content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(serviceLanguage, null, 2) }]
      }
    }
  • Input schema and metadata definition for the 'create_service_language' tool used in MCP tool listing.
      name: 'create_service_language',
      description: 'Crear un idioma de servicio.',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          name: { type: 'string', description: 'Nombre del idioma de servicio' }
        },
        required: ['name']
      }
    },
  • Helper method in ApiService that makes the HTTP POST request to create a service language resource.
    async createServiceLanguage (data: {
      name: string
      description: string
    }) {
      const headers = await this.getHeaders()
      const response = await fetch(`${API_CONFIG.baseUrl}/integrations/mcp/servicelanguage/create`, {
        method: 'POST',
        headers: { ...headers, 'Content-Type': 'application/json' },
        body: JSON.stringify(data)
      })
      return await this.handleResponse<any>(response)
    }
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('crear') without detailing outcomes, permissions, side effects, or response format. For a creation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate as it omits critical behavioral traits like whether it's idempotent, what happens on duplicate names, or if it requires specific authentication.

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?

The description is extremely concise with a single sentence, 'Crear un idioma de servicio.', which is front-loaded and wastes no words. It directly states the tool's action without unnecessary elaboration, making it efficient in structure, though this conciseness contributes to gaps in other dimensions like guidelines and transparency.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity of a creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what a 'service language' is, how it integrates with other tools, or what the tool returns upon success or error. The lack of behavioral and contextual details makes it insufficient for an agent to use the tool effectively in isolation.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'name' documented as 'Nombre del idioma de servicio' (Name of the service language). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as format constraints or examples. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline score of 3 applies, as the schema adequately handles parameter documentation without extra input from the description.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description 'Crear un idioma de servicio' (Create a service language) restates the tool name 'create_service_language' with minimal elaboration, making it tautological. It specifies the verb 'crear' (create) and resource 'idioma de servicio' (service language) but lacks differentiation from sibling tools like 'create_service' or 'create_program', failing to clarify what a 'service language' entails in this context.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, such as how it relates to sibling tools like 'list_service_languages' or 'delete_service_language'. The description offers no usage instructions, leaving the agent without direction on appropriate scenarios for invocation.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/lumile/lumbretravel-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server