Yenta Directory

Get venues (batch)

get_venues

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get several published venues' summaries in ONE call by their slugs — the batch counterpart to get_venue, so a shortlist from search_venues needs no per-slug round-trip; the base view (identity, essentials, capabilities, booking, mcp_endpoint) is always returned, while include opts into heavier per-venue reads — hours, dietary (dietary-tag/allergen vocabulary), attributes (facets) and menu_summary — with items coming back in the requested order (a repeated slug resolves once) and not_found listing any requested slug that did not resolve to a published venue.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slugs`	Yes	The venues' slugs, as returned by search_venues; duplicates resolve once. Either one slug per list entry, or comma-separated within an entry (a,b) — both work and mix; the cap applies to the total slug count.
`include`	No	Optional add-ons, any of: attributes, dietary, hours, menu_summary. Omit for the lean base view; an unknown value is a 422.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`item`	No
`items`	No
`reason`	No
`sample`	No
`source`	No	FR-13: which approved revision an answer was read from, and how fresh. ``source`` is ``approved-content-revision:<id>`` for every read that answers from one venue, and the literal ``directory`` for the two cross-venue reads, which have no single revision to cite.
`status`	Yes
`pagination`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / include / items / enum

Added value: +[
+  "attributes",
+  "dietary",
+  "hours",
+  "menu_summary"
+]

addedOutput schema / properties / sample

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Sample"
+}

First observedSep 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description goes beyond the readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint annotations by disclosing that only published venues are returned, items come back in requested order, duplicate slugs resolve once, and a not_found list identifies unresolved slugs. These are valuable behavioral traits an agent needs to know.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, long sentence but is front-loaded with the core purpose and then logically expands to usage contrast, base view, include options, and behavioral details. While dense, every clause carries information; it could be broken into sentences for readability, but it is not bloated.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a batch read tool with two well-documented parameters, an output schema, and annotations covering read-only and idempotency, the description covers all essential aspects: what it returns, how include affects payload, ordering, deduplication, and error handling for missing slugs. Nothing critical is omitted.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already documents both parameters well, and the description adds further context: slugs are as returned by search_venues, duplicates resolve once, comma-separated entries are allowed, and include options are enumerated with a note that unknown values cause a 422. This meaningfully supplements the schema.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Get several published venues' summaries in ONE call by their slugs'), and immediately contrasts it with get_venue as the 'batch counterpart,' making the purpose unambiguous and differentiating it from sibling tools like search_venues. It also outlines what the base view includes, which adds specificity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly tells when to use this tool: 'a shortlist from search_venues needs no per-slug round-trip,' directly positioning it as the batch alternative to get_venue. This gives clear usage context and an implied exclusion (use get_venue for single venues), which is sufficient guidance.

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

All Yenta Directory tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?