Skip to main content
Glama
phonhay103

maitabi-mcp-server

by phonhay103

search_general_tours

Find travel tours and mountain climbing packages by keyword, departure date, price range, and category. Returns matching tours with sorting and pagination.

Instructions

Search general travel tours and mountain climbing packages on www.maitabi.jp.

Returns a JSON string containing matching tours, total count, pagination, sorting, and categories.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dayNoDeparture day of month (1-31). Can be a single int, a list of ints, or a string range (e.g., '14-16, 20').
pageNoPage number (1-based)
keywordNoSearch keyword in Japanese (e.g., '富士山', '京都')
max_priceNoMaximum price in JPY (e.g., 50000). Filters the results before returning.
min_priceNoMinimum price in JPY (e.g., 10000). Filters the results before returning.
list_orderNoSort order: 'startDateAsc' (departure earliest), 'saikouStatus' (departure status), 'yoyakuStatus' (availability), 'priceAsc' (price low to high), 'priceDesc' (price high to low)
year_monthNoDeparture year-month string in 'YYYY-MM' format (e.g., '2026-08')
travel_typeNoCategory ID: 1=Domestic Mountain (default), 2=Domestic Travel, 3=Mountain Bus, 4=Overseas Mountain, 5=Overseas Travel
category_nos1NoSubcategory Nos for Style/Duration (e.g. [36] for Day trip, [259] for Overnight)
category_nos2NoSubcategory Nos for Difficulty/Shoes (e.g. [363] for Grade 1 / Introduction)
category_nos3NoSubcategory Nos for Departure Region (e.g. [13] for Kanto, [15] for Tokai)
category_nos4NoSubcategory Nos for Themes/Tours
category_nos5NoSubcategory Nos for Guides
require_available_seatsNoIf True, filters out full/closed tours (満席, 受付終了).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that the tool returns a JSON string with tours, total count, pagination, sorting, and categories, which is useful. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it disclose any side effects, rate limits, or dependency on the external site's state. For a search tool 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 sentences with no fluff. The purpose is front-loaded, and the return format is stated succinctly. Every word earns its place, and it is appropriately sized for a search tool with a rich schema.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given 14 parameters, a rich schema, and an output schema, the description is minimal but covers the core purpose and return. However, it fails to clarify the distinction from the sibling 'search_tours', leaving an agent potentially selecting the wrong tool. It also does not mention that the search is likely read-only, though that is less critical. The omission of alternative routing makes it incomplete for safe tool selection.

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 schema provides descriptions for all 14 parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already documents. It does not clarify parameter interactions, typical usage patterns, or any domain-specific conventions, so it does not elevate above the baseline.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Search' and the resource 'general travel tours and mountain climbing packages on www.maitabi.jp', and it specifies the return format. However, it does not differentiate itself from the sibling tool 'search_tours', which likely covers a different scope (e.g., general tours vs. specific categories). Since an agent could confuse the two, it lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_tours' or 'get_tour_detail'. It does not mention selection criteria, exclusions, or typical scenarios. The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone, which is insufficient given the overlapping sibling set.

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/phonhay103/maitabi-mcp-server'

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