get_event_week_cities
List cities that have upcoming event weeks with their counts. Use this to discover where major conferences are happening.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
List cities that have upcoming event weeks with their counts. Use this to discover where major conferences are happening.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Describes basic behavior but does not disclose ordering, pagination, definition of 'upcoming', or whether data is real-time.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with action and purpose, no wasted 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?
Tool is simple with no parameters, but lacks output schema or description of return format (e.g., list of city names with count values). Could be more complete for agent usage without 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?
No parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Description does not need to add param info; baseline of 4 is appropriate.
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?
Clearly states it lists cities with upcoming event weeks and their counts. Distinguishes from sibling 'get_cities' by focusing on cities with events, but could be more explicit about what 'counts' refers to.
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?
Suggests use case ('discover where major conferences are happening') but does not provide when-to-use vs alternatives like 'get_cities' or other sibling tools.
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.
Most tools target distinct resources and actions, such as get_artist vs get_artist_events and get_event_schedule vs get_now_playing. A few pairs like list_artists/search_artists and get_event_weeks/search_event_weeks could be confused, but their descriptions clarify browse vs search.
Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with get, list, and search. Minor inconsistency exists because get_ is used for both singular retrieval (get_artist) and collection listing (get_cities, get_event_weeks), while list_ only appears in list_artists. Overall predictable and readable.
16 tools is slightly above the typical 15-tool threshold but well-justified by the broad domain covering artists, events, venues, cities, event weeks, and organizers. Each tool serves a distinct purpose and none feel redundant.
The surface is comprehensive for a read-only events data API, covering artist browsing/search/details, event search/details/schedule/live, venue listing, city stats, event week management, and organizer search. Minor gaps include absent get_venue_details and get_organizer, but these can be derived from event details.