Look up a Nomad Stays product's price and purchasability — currently only product 8, the Stay Application fee (EUR 39). Returns isWaivedForCaller: true if the caller is already a Stay Partner re-applying, in which case there's nothing to pay and purchaseProduct will process the waiver automatically. Requires NOMADSTAYS_MCP_AGENT_TOKEN.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| productId | Yes | The product's EntryID — use 8 for the Stay Application fee |
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?
The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: it reveals the isWaivedForCaller return field, the special case for re-applying Stay Partners, and the authentication token requirement. No contradiction with 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?
Three sentences each add distinct value: purpose, return behavior/waiver logic, and auth requirement. No redundancy, front-loaded with the main purpose.
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 single-parameter read-only lookup with annotations, the description covers purpose, output meaning, the special waiver condition, and authentication. It is complete enough for an agent to decide when to use the tool and what to expect.
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?
The input schema already fully documents productId, including instruction to use 8. The description repeats this info but does not add new parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 looks up a product's price and purchasability, identifies the specific product (8, Stay Application fee), and distinguishes it from purchaseProduct by focusing on lookup rather than purchase. The verb 'look up' and resource 'Nomad Stays product' are specific.
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 usage as a pre-purchase check, referencing purchaseProduct for processing waivers, and notes the token requirement. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative lookup tools among many siblings.
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.
