SceneF — San Francisco Movie Showtimes

Search showtimes for a film

scenef_search_showtimes

Read-only

Showtimes scoped by FILM or by THEATER — pass at least one. With film: where that film is playing (title or slug; fuzzy-matched, ambiguous queries return candidates). With venues and no film: everything on at those theaters, each showtime naming its film. Grouped by theater with local times, tags (35mm/qa/sold-out), the night each show belongs to, and a ticket link per showtime. Optional date and time-window filters apply to both. For the whole board with no film or theater in mind, call scenef_whats_playing instead. In "detailed" mode every showtime also carries its confidence level, source tier, reporting sources, and verified_at timestamp.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	No	Restrict to one night, YYYY-MM-DD.
`film`	No	Film title, or a SceneF slug taken from films[].slug / scenef_whats_playing. A title that is not on the board answers with a miss and points at scenef_whats_playing, so guessing is safe but browsing is faster. Optional when `venues` is given — omit it to ask what is on at a theater.
`venues`	No	Restrict to these theaters (ids or names), e.g. ["roxie", "Balboa"]. Required when `film` is omitted.
`time_after`	No	Only shows at or after this local time, "HH:MM" 24h.
`time_before`	No	Only shows at or before this local time, "HH:MM" 24h.
`response_format`	No	Output size: "concise" (default) for tight text lines, "detailed" to add ids, per-showtime ticket urls, and extra metadata.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`film`	No
`query`	Yes
`venues`	Yes
`matched`	Yes
`refusal`	No
`candidates`	No
`data_as_of`	Yes
`attribution`	Yes
`filtered_by`	No
`accuracy_url`	Yes
`coverage_note`	Yes
`showtime_count`	Yes
`unknown_venues`	Yes

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already signal a safe read-only operation; the description adds rich behavioral context: fuzzy matching, ambiguous-query candidate responses, a miss behavior that points to the sibling, grouping by theater, tags, local times, ticket links, and detailed-mode metadata. This goes well beyond 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is longer than average, but every sentence adds distinct operational value: scoping modes, filters, output grouping, alternative routing, and detailed-mode extras. It is front-loaded with the core scoping constraint and avoids redundancy.

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 tool with 6 optional parameters, two scoping modes, fuzzy matching, and a detailed output mode, the description covers all the essential call decisions. Since an output schema exists, return-value details do not need to be repeated, and none of the operationally critical context is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds substantial meaning beyond field names: it explains the film-or-venues dependency, how slugs relate to films[]/scenef_whats_playing, what happens with unmatched titles, and what 'detailed' response_format adds. This significantly helps an agent choose and fill parameters correctly.

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?

States exactly what the tool does: searches showtimes scoped by film or theater. It distinguishes itself from the sibling scenef_whats_playing by clarifying that this tool is for film-or-theater scoped queries, while the sibling is for the whole board.

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?

Explicitly says when to use this tool ('with film', 'with venues and no film') and when to use the alternative ('call scenef_whats_playing instead' for the whole board). It also gives the important constraint 'pass at least one' and describes behavior for ambiguous or missing films.

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

All SceneF — San Francisco Movie Showtimes tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct query shapes: film lookup, theater card, discount list, coming-soon radar, and recommendation planner are easy to separate. Some overlap exists because several tools expose showtimes from different angles (e.g. scenef_whats_playing vs. scenef_now, and scenef_film_details vs. scenef_search_showtimes), but the descriptions provide enough grounding that an agent can usually select correctly.

Naming Consistency3/5

Every tool is prefixed with scenef_ and uses snake_case, which gives a consistent visual identity. Nevertheless, the pattern after the prefix is mixed: some names are nouns (scenef_discounts, scenef_accuracy), some are time references (scenef_now, scenef_coming_soon), and some are verb-first (scenef_search_showtimes, scenef_plan_movie_night). It is readable but not a single predictable verb_noun convention.

Tool Count5/5

Nine tools is right in the ideal range and each tool earns its place in the SF showtimes domain. The set covers discovery, detail lookups, discounts, recommendations, and data-accuracy verification without feeling padded or bloated.

Completeness4/5

The domain is covered broadly: film discovery, film details, theater details, per-film showtimes, coming soon, discounts, nightly overview, personalized planning, and accuracy metrics. The main gap is that there is no simple cross-film showtimes-for-a-specific-date listing, but agents can usually work around this with scenef_whats_playing and scenef_search_showtimes.

Resources

Need Help?