Skip to main content
Glama

DC Member API

by io.github.dynamitecircle

event_schedule

GET /events/:eventID/schedule — Get event schedule

Returns the full schedule (sessions) for an event, sorted chronologically.

Access: any active DCer who can see the event can view its public schedule. Personal agenda actions still require a valid ticket.

Time-zone handling: session startAt / endAt are returned as ISO 8601 strings whose digits represent the venue-local wall-clock time (e.g. a 9 AM Mexico City session returns 2026-05-08T09:00:00.000Z, NOT 15:00:00Z). The session's timezone field carries the IANA zone (e.g. America/Mexico_City) — pair them when localizing. This matches the convention used by the DC ICS feed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eventIDYesEvent ID

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return structure (full schedule, sorted), access constraints, and important time-zone behavior (wall-clock time vs UTC). This is transparent and useful for the agent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is concise, front-loaded with the endpoint and purpose, and then provides essential details on access and time-zone handling. Each sentence adds value without redundancy.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given no output schema, the description explains the return value (full schedule, sorted) and time-zone handling. However, it omits details about the structure of session objects and whether pagination is used. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter eventID, so the schema already provides the meaning. The description adds context about the endpoint path but no new parameter semantics beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves an event's schedule via GET /events/:eventID/schedule, specifying it returns sessions sorted chronologically. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like event_agenda, but the purpose is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides access rules (any active DCer can view public schedule) and time-zone handling guidance. However, it does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives like event_agenda or event_agenda_get, nor does it mention exclusions.

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