Skip to main content
Glama
lumile

LumbreTravel MCP Server

by lumile

get_provider_by_name

Search for travel providers by name to access their details and services within the LumbreTravel platform.

Instructions

Buscar proveedores por su nombre

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesNombre del proveedor

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function in callTool that processes the 'get_provider_by_name' tool call, extracts the name argument, invokes the ApiService method, and returns the provider data as a JSON-formatted text response.
    case 'get_provider_by_name': {
      const { name } = args as { name: string }
      const provider = await this.apiService.getProviderByName(name)
      return {
        content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(provider, null, 2) }]
      }
    }
  • The tool definition in listTools(), including name, description, and inputSchema for validating arguments (requires 'name' string). This defines the tool's interface for MCP.
    {
      name: 'get_provider_by_name',
      description: 'Buscar proveedores por su nombre',
      inputSchema: { type: 'object', properties: { name: { type: 'string', description: 'Nombre del proveedor' } }, required: ['name'] }
    },
  • src/index.ts:36-48 (registration)
    Registers the MCP server request handlers for ListToolsRequestSchema (listing tools including get_provider_by_name) and CallToolRequestSchema (executing tool calls via toolsHandler).
    private setupHandlers (): void {
      // Configure handlers to list tools
      this.server.setRequestHandler(
        ListToolsRequestSchema,
        async () => this.toolsHandler.listTools()
      )
    
      // Configure handlers for tools
      this.server.setRequestHandler(
        CallToolRequestSchema,
        async (request) => await this.toolsHandler.callTool(request.params.name, request.params.arguments, this.server)
      )
    }
  • Helper method in ApiService that makes an authenticated POST request to the backend API endpoint to retrieve providers by name.
    async getProviderByName (name: string) {
      const headers = await this.getHeaders()
      const response = await fetch(`${API_CONFIG.baseUrl}/integrations/mcp/provider/get_providers_by_name`, {
        method: 'POST',
        headers: { ...headers, 'Content-Type': 'application/json' },
        body: JSON.stringify({ name })
      })
      return await this.handleResponse<any>(response)
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions searching but doesn't specify if this is a read-only operation, how results are returned (e.g., exact match, partial match, pagination), error handling, or any rate limits. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence in Spanish that directly states the tool's function. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with no wasted words, though it could benefit from more detail given the lack of annotations.

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 search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, match behavior, or error cases, leaving gaps that could hinder an AI agent's ability to use the tool effectively.

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 'name' parameter documented as 'Nombre del proveedor.' The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or search behavior. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description 'Buscar proveedores por su nombre' translates to 'Search providers by their name,' which clearly states the action (search) and resource (providers) but lacks specificity about what 'providers' are in this context and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_providers' or 'get_agency_by_name.' It's vague but conveys the basic purpose.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 such as 'list_providers' or other 'get_by_name' tools for different resources. The description implies usage by name but doesn't specify prerequisites, exclusions, or context, leaving the agent to infer based on tool names alone.

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