venumark

submit_lead

Send an organizer's contact request to the VenuMark founder (setup help, demo, festival or city program, Enterprise scope). Only call after the user has explicitly confirmed the exact details to send. The founder replies by email, usually the same day.

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "email": "<email>"
    },
    "name": "submit_lead"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`city`	No	Florida city or region (optional)
`name`	Yes	The person's name
`email`	Yes	Where the founder should reply
`message`	No	What they need help with (optional)
`event_type`	No	e.g. brewery food truck night, festival, farmers market, city event
`organization`	No	Business, venue, or city (optional)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJul 6, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided. Description mentions action and email reply but doesn't disclose potential side effects, reversibility, or auth needs. Adequate but not detailed.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage condition. No unnecessary words, efficient and clear.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Covers purpose, usage condition, and outcome (founder replies). Missing output schema but description provides enough context for an agent. Could mention return value.

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% with descriptions. Description adds context for usage (confirmation) but doesn't provide additional parameter constraints or formats. Baseline 3.

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?

Clearly states it sends an organizer's contact request to the VenuMark founder, specifying scope (setup help, demo, etc.). Distinct from sibling tools like search or get_event.

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?

Explicitly states 'Only call after the user has explicitly confirmed the exact details' and provides follow-up info. Lacks alternatives but sufficient given context.

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

All venumark 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?