Skip to main content
Glama

Nomad Stays

by io.github.nomadstays

updateStayRoom

Update an existing room on a Stay. Only fields supplied are changed. Call getRoomTypeOptions(stayId) and getRoomFacilityOptions() first to find valid roomTypeFK/roomFacilityFk values. Requires an MCP agent token scoped to the owning account.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bedsNo
roomIdYesThe room's EntryID (tbStaysRoom) — use getMyStayRooms to find it
stayIdYesThe Stay's EntryID
maxPersonNo
mcpRoomIdNoExternal MCP room identifier. NOT AVAILABLE for boutique Stays — the host UI has no field for this there, and the API will reject it.
roomTitleNo
roomTypeFKNoA roomTypeId from getRoomTypeOptions(stayId).
mainBedSizeNo
otherBedSizeNo
roomFacilityFkNoThe FULL replacement list of facilityDetailId values from getRoomFacilityOptions() — anything not included will be removed (except Wi-Fi, which is always kept).
roomDescriptionNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With neutral annotations (no read-only or destructive hints), the description carries the burden of transparency. It discloses partial-update behavior ('Only fields supplied are changed') and the authentication requirement ('MCP agent token scoped to the owning account'). However, it does not mention the full-replacement semantics of roomFacilityFk (though that is in the schema), and it does not discuss any side effects beyond the update itself.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, update behavior, prerequisites/auth. It is front-loaded with the core action and maintains excellent brevity without sacrificing essential 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 tool with 11 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what it does, partial update, prerequisites, and auth. It does not explain the return value, but that is not critical for a mutation tool. The guidance to call option-fetching endpoints before use addresses the most complex param dependencies, making it sufficiently complete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 45%, and the description adds value by directing users to the option-fetching endpoints for roomTypeFK and roomFacilityFk. It also clarifies that all non-required fields are optional via partial-update semantics. However, it does not help with the six params lacking schema descriptions (beds, maxPerson, roomTitle, mainBedSize, otherBedSize, roomDescription), leaving some semantics to inference from names.

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 states 'Update an existing room on a Stay' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing from createStayRoom and deleteStayRoom. The additional 'Only fields supplied are changed' clarifies the partial-update semantics, making the tool's purpose 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 provides clear context for when to use the tool, including the prerequisite calls to getRoomTypeOptions and getRoomFacilityOptions. It implicitly differentiates from sibling creation/deletion tools, though it stops short of explicitly stating when not to use it or naming alternatives. The prerequisite call guidance is valuable and earns a high score.

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

All Nomad Stays toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

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.

Naming Consistency3/5

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.

Tool Count1/5

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.

Completeness3/5

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.

Resources