Get full details for a conference week including all its side events. Use this to help users see everything happening during a major conference.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | No | The slug of the event week (alternative to week_id) | |
| week_id | No | The UUID of the event week to retrieve | |
| event_week_id | No | Alias for week_id |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral transparency. It states the tool returns 'full details' and 'side events,' but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, or whether it is idempotent. The lack of detail on what constitutes 'full details' leaves the agent guessing about the response structure.
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 consists of two sentences that efficiently convey purpose and usage guidance. Every sentence adds value with no unnecessary words or repetition.
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?
The tool has 3 parameters (all optional, 100% schema coverage) and no output schema. The description explains it returns 'full details and side events' but does not specify the exact fields returned (e.g., dates, venues, organizers). For a detail-retrieval tool, more information about the output structure would improve completeness.
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 100%, meaning all three parameters (slug, week_id, event_week_id) are described in the input schema. The description does not add any extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, e.g., which parameter to prefer or any constraints. Baseline score of 3 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?
Description clearly states 'Get full details for a conference week including all its side events.' This provides a specific verb and resource, and the inclusion of side events distinguishes it from tools like get_event_weeks (which lists weeks) and get_event_details (single event).
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 second sentence, 'Use this to help users see everything happening during a major conference,' gives context for when to use the tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but the sibling tool names imply alternatives for listing weeks or single events.
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.