Update a Stay's title and/or description. Requires an MCP agent token (NOMADSTAYS_MCP_AGENT_TOKEN) scoped to the owning account. Only fields supplied are changed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | No | OPTIONAL: new title | |
| stayId | Yes | The Stay's EntryID | |
| description | No | OPTIONAL: new description |
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 provide readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds valuable context beyond that: the requirement for an MCP agent token scoped to the owning account, and the partial-update behavior ('Only fields supplied are changed'). 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?
Two sentences with no wasted words: the first states the purpose, the second covers auth and partial update. Front-loaded and efficient.
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 3-parameter update tool with complete schema descriptions and annotations, the description covers purpose, auth requirements, and partial update behavior. The absence of return-value info is acceptable given no output schema and low complexity.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by stating that only supplied fields are changed, which clarifies how the optional title and description parameters behave in a partial update. This is a useful semantic beyond the schema's 'OPTIONAL' labels.
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 uses a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('Stay's title and/or description'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like updateStayContacts and updateStayRoom by explicitly limiting scope to title and description.
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 clearly confines usage to updating a Stay's title and/or description, which implies when to use this tool versus others. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state 'use X for other fields,' so it lacks explicit exclusions.
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.
