Find Los Angeles bars and nightclubs: by vibe (cocktail, rooftop, dive, techno...), near a location, or with happy hour running right now. Includes ratings, hours, happy hour info and links.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lat | No | ||
| lon | No | ||
| vibe | No | One vibe tag, e.g. "rooftop". Call get_taxonomy for the list. | |
| limit | No | ||
| category | No | ||
| happy_hour_now | No | Only places with happy hour active or starting within an hour |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions included info (ratings, hours, happy hour details, links) but does not disclose any side effects, limitations, or error behavior. It gives adequate but not deep transparency.
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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the verb 'Find', and conveys all key capabilities without unnecessary words.
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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main use cases and return info. It lacks details on parameter constraints and error handling but is overall sufficient.
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 33% (only 2 out of 6 parameters have descriptions). The description adds context for vibe and happy_hour_now but does not fully compensate for the missing parameter documentation.
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 bars and nightclubs in Los Angeles with specific filters like vibe, location, and happy hour. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that focus on events or tickets.
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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (finding bars with various criteria). It does not explicitly state when not to use it or offer alternatives, but the purpose is well-defined.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct role: venue finders (bars, museums), event search, ticket price comparison, event details, change history, taxonomy, and a curated nightly snapshot. While find_bars and search_events could theoretically overlap for nightlife, the descriptions explicitly scope them to venues vs. events, eliminating ambiguity.
The tool names mostly follow a verb_noun pattern: find_* for venue discovery, get_* for retrieval, search_events for event search. However, `whats_on_tonight` breaks the pattern with an idiomatic phrase, and `find` vs `search` are used interchangeably for discovery, causing minor inconsistency.
With 8 tools, the server is well-scoped for an LA event discovery service covering search, venue lookups, ticket prices, history, taxonomy, and a nightly roundup. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or bloat.
The tool surface covers the full read-only lifecycle: searching events, finding bars and museums, retrieving event details, comparing ticket prices, viewing historical changes, and exploring taxonomy tags. For its stated purpose of providing a synoptic LA event view, there are no significant gaps.