Skip to main content
Glama

DC Member API

by io.github.dynamitecircle

event_attendees

GET /events/:eventID/attendees — List event attendees

List the confirmed attendees of an event — DCers holding a valid paid ticket OR a valid/maybe RSVP status. Refunded/canceled tickets are excluded. Hidden and guest profiles are filtered out.

Profiles returned use the same shape as the rest of the API (GET /profile-match, GET /trips/:tripID/discovery, etc.) — full public-other-person view including businessName and expertise, plus privacy-gated annualRevenue + teamSize where shared. Social handles are not included.

Access: any active DCer can view event attendees, matching the in-app attendee tab.

Pagination: newest first; page with ?limit= (1-100, default 100) plus the opaque ?cursor= from the previous response's nextCursor (null when there are no more).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax results (1-100).
cursorNoCursor from a previous response's `nextCursor`. Pass to fetch the next page.
eventIDYesThe event ID

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses ticket/RSVP filtering, hidden/guest exclusion, profile shape, access control, pagination order, and cursor handling. This level of transparency exceeds typical API descriptions.

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 structured with a lead sentence, then bullet-like sections for Access and Pagination. Every sentence adds information; no filler. Despite length, it remains scannable.

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?

For a list endpoint with no output schema, the description covers what is returned, access, pagination, and exclusions. It doesn't document error cases or response envelope details, but the core usage is fully specified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema covers all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds semantic context by explaining that results are newest first, that limit defaults to 100 and ranges 1-100, and that cursor is an opaque token from nextCursor. This goes beyond the schema's simple descriptions.

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?

The description opens with the endpoint and a clear verb-resource summary ('List event attendees'). It then precisely defines which attendees are included (valid paid ticket or valid/maybe RSVP) and explicitly excludes refunded/canceled tickets and hidden/guest profiles, distinguishing it from sibling attendee tools.

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?

The description provides clear context: any active DCer can use it, and it matches the in-app attendee tab. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is sufficient for a list endpoint.

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

All DC Member API toolsInspect
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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Despite the large number of tools, each has a detailed description that clearly distinguishes its purpose. Minor potential overlaps (e.g., search vs. resource-specific search, own vs. other's agenda) are well documented, so an agent can differentiate them.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun or resource_subresource_action pattern in snake_case. A few tools are just nouns (e.g., 'alerts', 'announcements'), but these are top-level listing endpoints; overall the naming is predictable.

Tool Count2/5

85 tools is very high for a single server, making it difficult for an agent to efficiently explore and select the right tool. While each tool seems justified for the broad domain, the count feels overwhelming and could be streamlined.

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers most major areas (events, trips, chapters, rooms, search, profile, etc.) with CRUD or lifecycle operations. However, the lack of a 'send message' tool for rooms is a notable gap, and some resources (e.g., events) are read-only on creation/update, limiting agent workflows.

Resources