Booking.com

Name: Booking.com MCP Server
Availability: InStock
Author: Booking.com

HIPAA CompliantSOC2 ReadyISO 27001 Ready

Productivity1 tool

Search Booking.com accommodation from an AI agent. Anthropic lists one tool, a search — nothing here books a room, takes a card or cancels a reservation. Booking.com's own docs name six tools the directory omits, and the endpoint carries an affiliate ID.

Verified connector

Listed by Anthropic as a partner connector in its Connectors Directory.

Connection checked by Agentman on 22 August 2026.

Anthropic states this reflects the level of review a connector received, not a security audit.

Connect Booking.com via MCP

https://demandapi-mcp.booking.com/v1/mcp/8132308

Works in any MCP-compatible client. In Agentman Studio it is one click — no config file to edit.

Booking.com Tools & Capabilities (1)

Tool names from Anthropic's directory listing. This server requires sign-in, so we could not read tool descriptions or parameter schemas.

Limits

It cannot book, pay, cancel or modify anything. Booking.com's Limitations section states the connector does not support completing bookings, processing payments, managing or modifying reservations, or accessing your Booking.com account. Every result terminates in a link.
The directory under-lists the surface by five tools. Anthropic lists accommodations_search; Booking.com's implementation guide names six tools. Booking.com states the set is scoped per affiliate ID and that tools/list is the authoritative source for an account, so the listing is a floor set by configuration — and one that can widen without any visible change in the directory.
We could not verify the auth posture live. Our single anonymous initialize request returned HTTP 403 from CloudFront with an HTML "Request blocked" body, x-cache: Error from cloudfront and no WWW-Authenticate header. A deliberately nonsensical affiliate path returned a byte-identical block. That is an edge WAF rejection, not an authentication challenge, so it tells us nothing about auth and authVerified is false. The bearer-token requirement on this page comes from Booking.com's documentation, not from our observation.
No OAuth or scope document exists. Four RFC 9728 and OAuth metadata probes each reached the origin — not the edge — and returned a JSON 404 naming the requested route, matching a nonsense control in shape and differing only in the echoed path. So the server genuinely publishes no oauth-protected-resource and no oauth-authorization-server document. Authentication is a static bearer token with no scope mechanism, which means nothing at the credential separates searching from any operation the token is otherwise entitled to.
We could not read any tool schema or safety annotation. No readOnlyHint, destructiveHint or parameter type is reported here for any tool. The parameter descriptions on this page come from Booking.com's prose documentation, and the vendor explicitly warns against relying on copied parameter tables — it advises treating the live schema as the single source of truth.
Five of the six vendor-named tools have no published description. Booking.com lists their names and nothing else. We do not describe what they do beyond their names.
Whose affiliate account 8132308 is, is undetermined. Booking.com documents the path segment as an affiliate ID and documents affiliate IDs as commission-attribution identifiers, but publishes no mapping from ID to partner, and we found no Booking.com or Anthropic statement describing a commercial arrangement for this connector. Bookings completed after a connector link are attributable to that account; we do not claim to know who holds it, and the number does not reveal it.
Booking.com's affiliate support centre would not render for us. Its knowledge-base articles defining an affiliate ID and describing commission are Salesforce pages that return only an error shell to a plain fetch. Their text is publicly indexed and consistent with the fully-renderable affiliate programme pages we did read, but the support-centre wording on this page is index-sourced rather than fetched. That is an extractor failure on our side, not evidence Booking.com published nothing.
Ranking is commercial by default. Booking.com documents that location-filtered results sort by its own popularity metric in descending order. The connector documentation does not state which sort it requests, so a shortlist should be read as merchandised.
Rate limits are per partner account, not per user. Booking.com documents Demand API rate limits as applying to a partner account per minute, returning HTTP 429 with access restored after roughly a minute, and directs partners to their account manager for the specific figure. No figure is published, and no document states whether the MCP endpoint shares that budget — but a shared per-account budget means other consumers of the same affiliate ID affect you.
Prices and availability move fast, and Booking.com says to re-check. Its connector page advises confirming final pricing and availability on Booking.com before completing a booking. US pricing carries a further wrinkle: Booking.com documents FTC total-price rules requiring the all-in price to be shown more prominently than components, and we found no statement about how a conversational summary satisfies that.
Personal data about hosts exists in the underlying API. Booking.com's DSA compliance guide documents a trader object containing host PII — address, email, name, registration number, phone. Whether the MCP surface returns it is undocumented either way.
Booking.com's llms-full.txt and robots.txt both 404 into the docs site's client-rendered shell, so no crawl policy was readable for developers.booking.com. The llms.txt index and the .md suffix route both work, and every vendor page cited here came through one of them.

Frequently asked questions

No. Booking.com states in its connector documentation that bookings and payments do not happen inside Claude and that all reservations are completed on Booking.com. It lists completing bookings, processing payments, managing reservations and accessing your account as things the connector does not support. Results end in a link you follow.

It is an affiliate ID. Booking.com's implementation guide documents the endpoint as a path carrying the affiliate ID, and its authentication guide defines an affiliate ID as the identifier of a Booking.com partner account. Booking.com publishes no statement naming whose account 8132308 is, so we do not claim to know.

Anthropic's directory lists one and Booking.com's own documentation names six. The vendor states tools are scoped to your affiliate ID, so the surface differs per partner. One is what this affiliate's listing shows; six is what the server can carry. Neither number was verified by handshake.

Not from you. Booking.com's connector page states no authentication is required to search for accommodations. Its MCP server documentation separately states every request needs a bearer token, which the hosted connector supplies on your behalf. You may be asked to sign in on Booking.com itself if you go on to book.

Your search parameters only. Booking.com states it receives the destination, travel dates, guest numbers and selected filters, and that it does not receive your Claude chat history and does not require your Booking.com account. Its search API separately requires a booker country code, so a country travels with each query.

They are a snapshot, and Booking.com says so. Its connector page states availability and prices can change quickly and that what appears in Claude reflects the latest data at the time of the search. It advises confirming final pricing and availability on Booking.com before completing a booking.

No, and it is not presented as neutral. Booking.com's Demand API documentation states that when location filters are applied, results are sorted by Booking.com popularity in descending order by default. That is a commercial ranking. The connector documentation does not say which sort order it requests.

No. Booking.com's connector documentation lists Claude Web, Claude Desktop, Claude Mobile and Claude Cowork as supported, and Claude Code as not supported. Booking.com separately documents a self-hosted route for its own partners using the mcp-remote bridge with a partner bearer token, which is a different integration.