@striderlabs/mcp-american

get_boarding_pass

Retrieve digital boarding passes for an already checked-in flight using your confirmation code and last name.

Instructions

Retrieve digital boarding passes for a checked-in flight. Requires prior check-in.

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": {
      "recordLocator": "<recordLocator>",
      "lastName": "<lastName>"
    },
    "name": "get_boarding_pass"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lastName`	Yes	Passenger last name
`recordLocator`	Yes	The 6-character confirmation code (e.g., 'ABC123')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 3, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation via 'Retrieve' and adds the prerequisite of prior check-in, but does not disclose return format, error behavior for un-checked-in passengers, or any other side effects. This is adequate but not rich.

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 two concise sentences with the verb front-loaded. Every word adds value, and there is no redundant information or repetition of schema details.

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?

For a simple retrieval tool with complete schema coverage and no output schema, the description provides the core purpose and a key prerequisite. It doesn't explain return values, but that isn't required given the simplicity of the operation. It could mention what the boarding pass contains, but the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand when to use it.

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 fully describes both parameters (recordLocator and lastName) with clear descriptions and an example. The description adds no additional parameter context, but the schema alone provides high coverage, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Retrieve') and the resource ('digital boarding passes for a checked-in flight'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like check_in and get_reservation. It is specific and unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly notes 'Requires prior check-in', which clearly indicates when this tool is appropriate. Although it doesn't name alternative tools, the precondition is a clear usage guideline that separates it from check-in related actions.

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

Deploy Server