events
Server Details
Agent-first Austin events concierge — fresh, sourced answers to what's happening in Austin.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
find_events and overview have clearly distinct purposes: one queries events, the other reports system health. No overlap or ambiguity.
Both use snake_case, but find_events follows a verb_noun pattern while overview is a standalone noun. Minor inconsistency but still readable.
Only 2 tools for an events server feels underdeveloped. Typically such servers offer at least basic CRUD, making this count too low for the apparent scope.
Lacks essential operations like creating, updating, or deleting events. Only query and system health are present, leaving significant gaps.
Available Tools
2 toolsfind_eventsAInspect
Find upcoming Austin events from Yeehaw's sourced, deduplicated store. Structured filter over the events table; events more than 24h past are filtered. Every record carries a source attribution and a confidence score. Pass id to fetch one event by id; it ignores date_range and all other filters.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | Fetch one event by id; ignores date_range and other filters when set. | |
| limit | No | Max results, default 20, clamped to 50. | |
| query | No | Free-text keyword match against event titles. | |
| category | No | Category slug (e.g. music, sports, civic). | |
| price_max | No | Maximum ticket price in USD. price_max=0 returns only events with a known $0 price. Most events have no listed price (sparse upstream data) — for price_max>0 those are still returned and the response states how many were not price-filtered. | |
| date_range | No | Required unless `id` is set. e.g. today, tonight, this_weekend, next_7_days, or an ISO date range. | |
| neighborhood | No | Austin neighborhood slug. One of: downtown, east-austin, hyde-park, mueller, rainey-street, south-congress, the-domain, zilker. Common shorthands (east, domain, soco, rainey) are accepted. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that events beyond 24 hours are filtered, every record carries source and confidence, id mode ignores other filters, and price_max has special behavior for missing prices. This covers key behavioral traits beyond the basic purpose.
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?
The description is well-structured: a brief high-level purpose followed by a key filtering statement, then parameter-specific details. It is not overly verbose; each sentence adds value. A slight deduction for including some parameter details that might be considered extra, but overall 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 tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the most important aspects: the time filter, the special id mode, price_max behavior, and neighborhood shorthands. It would benefit from briefly noting the return format (e.g., array of event objects), but the mention of source and confidence partially addresses this. The contextual completeness is high given the 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 description coverage is 100%, so each parameter has a description. The tool description adds meaningful additional context: for id, it explains it ignores other filters; for price_max, it describes sparse data handling; for neighborhood, it lists accepted shorthands. These enrich the schema information.
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 clearly states the tool finds upcoming Austin events from a specific store. It identifies the verb (find) and resource (events from Yeehaw's store). However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'overview', so it loses a point for sibling differentiation.
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 implicitly guides usage by stating that date_range is required unless id is set, and that id ignores other filters. It explains the time filter (events more than 24h past are filtered) but does not specify when to use this tool over the sibling 'overview' or provide explicit when-not situations. Usage context is adequate but not comprehensive.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
overviewAInspect
Inspectable State: report Yeehaw's operational state in one call (no input) — event counts, last successful ingest per source vs cadence, cron health, open circuit breakers, recent error tail, and coverage gaps.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It lists what is reported but does not disclose behavioral traits like data freshness, caching, permissions, or side effects. For a read-only operation, this is adequate but not fully transparent.
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?
The description is one sentence listing key items; it is efficient but could be more scannable with bullet points. Every phrase earns its place.
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?
Given no output schema, the description enumerates expected return data, which is helpful. However, it could be more detailed (e.g., format, example values) to fully compensate for the missing output schema.
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?
The schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage, so the description simply confirms no input needed. This adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but the baseline for zero parameters is 4.
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 specifies the verb 'report' and the resource 'Yeehaw's operational state', listing concrete data categories (event counts, ingest health, etc.), which clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'find_events' that presumably searches for events.
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 implies usage for a high-level status check via 'in one call (no input)', but does not explicitly contrast with 'find_events' or state when to prefer overview over the sibling.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!