getCountryOptions
List valid values for a Stay's country (countryId in updateStayOrganisationalData), with each country's name and 2-letter code. Requires NOMADSTAYS_MCP_AGENT_TOKEN.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
List valid values for a Stay's country (countryId in updateStayOrganisationalData), with each country's name and 2-letter code. Requires NOMADSTAYS_MCP_AGENT_TOKEN.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read behavior is covered. The description adds the auth requirement ('Requires NOMADSTAYS_MCP_AGENT_TOKEN') and the return content (name and 2-letter code), providing useful context beyond the annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and then the auth note. Every sentence adds necessary information with no filler or repetition of schema details.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple, zero-parameter, read-only tool, the description fully covers what is returned (country name and 2-letter code), its purpose (valid values for countryId), and access requirements. The lack of an output schema is compensated by explicitly stating the return contents.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
There are zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of the output (valid values for countryId) even though no parameter documentation is needed. Baseline 4 applies due to no params.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's function: 'List valid values for a Stay's country' with output details ('name and 2-letter code'). It also distinguishes from siblings by referencing the specific field (countryId in updateStayOrganisationalData), making its purpose unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies when to use the tool by tying it to a specific field ('countryId in updateStayOrganisationalData'), which guides the agent to use it when needing valid country values for updates. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it, but the context is clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, with detailed descriptions differentiating the many getStaysBy* search variants and the four availability tools. However, the overlap between checkStayAvailability, getRoomAvailability, findNearestAvailability, and getAvailabilityByMonth could still cause confusion for an agent, though the descriptions largely mitigate this.
The tools mostly follow a verb-noun pattern with get*, update*, create*, and delete* dominating, but the mix of additional verbs (check, find, list, search, signup, book, quote, purchase, submit, save, reorder, upload) and inconsistent noun forms (Stay vs. Stays, MyStay vs. Stay) prevents a fully predictable naming scheme. CamelCase is consistent, but the verb variety is high.
With 76 tools, this server far exceeds the well-scoped range and even the 50+ threshold for extreme mismatch. While the platform covers multiple domains, this many tools is overwhelming for an agent and would likely be better split into focused sub-servers.
The tool surface is broad, covering search, stay management, applications, bookings, products, and help center. However, there are notable lifecycle gaps: no cancel booking, no delete stay, no delete application, and no way to update or delete a booking. These missing operations create potential dead ends for common workflows.