ConferenceDB

Find sponsors for an event

find_sponsors_for_event

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when someone organizing a conference, trade show or event wants companies that might sponsor or exhibit at it. Takes their event (a name or website, if it is in the database) and/or a topic and a place. Returns the companies listed at the most similar conferences, with how many of those conferences each was at, how many as a sponsor or partner, and a few of the events, plus the conferences compared. Company-level only.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

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

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`event`	No	The organizer's own conference or one like it: a name such as "Money20/20" or a website such as money2020.com.
`limit`	No	Companies to return, default 25, at most 50.
`topic`	No	Industry or subject of the event, such as fintech, healthcare, AI or retail. Leave out to use the named event's industry.
`location`	No	A city, country or region, such as Chicago, Germany or Europe. Leave out for anywhere.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`found`	Yes
`scope`	Yes
`message`	Yes
`returned`	Yes
`companies`	Yes
`finder_url`	Yes
`matched_event`	Yes
`total_companies`	Yes
`example_conferences`	Yes
`conferences_compared`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, yet the description still adds substantive context: results derive from the most similar conferences, include attendance/sponsor counts and sample events, and appear alongside the conferences compared. That is real information an agent cannot read off the annotations.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the usage trigger, then inputs, then outputs — no filler. The last fragment 'Company-level only.' is terse but purposeful in delimiting scope.

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 an output schema present and full parameter documentation in the schema, the description covers trigger, inputs, and a summary of the result shape, including the 'conferences compared' context. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter; the description adds above that by explaining the event can be a name or a website and that topic/location are fallbacks when no matching event exists. Marginal but genuine value beyond the schema.

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 ('companies that might sponsor or exhibit') and scopes the input as the organizer's own or a similar event. The 'Company-level only' note plus 'companies listed at the most similar conferences' implicitly separates it from get_conference_sponsors, though no sibling is named outright.

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 opening sentence gives an explicit trigger scenario ('when someone organizing a conference, trade show or event wants companies that might sponsor'), and the 'and/or' phrasing clarifies that event, topic and location are combinable or optional. It stops short of naming alternatives or exclusions, so it does not reach a 5.

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

All ConferenceDB 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?