LexGO Jobs

Get LexGO event

get_event

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns one upcoming LexGO event by integer id, id-slug, url, or click_url. click_url is the link to the event on LexGO.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_event"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Integer id, id-slug, or an allowlisted lexgo.be/lu event URL

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`url`	No
`domain`	No
`titles`	No
`company`	No
`click_url`	No
`languages`	No
`summaries`	No
`event_ends_at`	No
`event_starts_at`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 4, 2026
- changedOutput schema / properties / event_ends_at / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
- changedOutput schema / properties / event_starts_at / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
First observedSep 15, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful scope constraint that only upcoming events are returned, but says nothing about not-found or error behavior, and the trailing click_url sentence describes an output field rather than tool behavior.

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?

Two short sentences with the retrieval scope front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence explains click_url, which reads as a return-field aside on an input-focused tool and could be trimmed or moved.

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?

With rich annotations, an output schema, one parameter at full schema coverage, and no nesting, the description supplies everything needed to call the tool correctly. No essential behavior or input detail is missing.

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 coverage is 100% for the single id parameter, so the baseline applies. The description echoes the accepted forms and adds 'click_url' as an input, which is not mentioned in the schema and slightly conflicts with its 'allowlisted lexgo.be/lu event URL' wording, so it adds marginal rather than clarifying detail.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Returns one upcoming LexGO event') plus the accepted identifier forms, so it is immediately distinguishable from list_events. It never names a sibling explicitly, which keeps it short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Single-item retrieval versus listing is strongly implied by 'one upcoming LexGO event', but there is no explicit when-to-use rule, no pointer to list_events or search alternatives, and no guidance on what to do when the id is unknown.

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

All LexGO Jobs 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?