Get ticket types and prices for a specific event (Wix Events). Pass the event slug from list_events. Returns ticket names, prices, sale status, and how many are left.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| event_slug | Yes | Event slug from list_events. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly lists the return data: 'ticket names, prices, sale status, and how many are left', which gives the agent a clear picture of the output. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, error handling, or whether all ticket types are returned, but for a getter these omissions are minor. The description adds sufficient behavioral context to warrant a 4.
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 is two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence earns its place. The first sentence states the action and scope, the second gives input guidance and output details. No fluff or redundancy.
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?
Given the simple nature of the tool (1 parameter, no output schema), the description is nearly complete: it covers what the tool does, the input source, and the expected return fields. It lacks explicit error or edge-case handling, but for a straightforward getter, this is acceptable. The 4 accounts for the lack of an output schema and the absence of any note about why you might not want to use this tool.
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?
The schema has 100% coverage with the property description 'Event slug from list_events', which already explains the parameter. The description repeats this instruction rather than adding new meaning. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline is 3, and the description does not extend beyond the schema, so no higher score is justified.
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?
The description opens with 'Get ticket types and prices for a specific event (Wix Events)', which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_events (which lists events) and reserve_event_tickets (which likely reserves tickets). The event slug relationship is explicitly tied to list_events, making the purpose unmistakable.
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 description states 'Pass the event slug from list_events', which clearly indicates a prerequisite and establishes the expected workflow. It implies this tool is used before reserving or checking out, but it does not explicitly say when to avoid using it or name alternatives for excluding use cases. This is clear context without explicit exclusions, so a 4 is appropriate.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action (e.g., create_booking vs create_checkout, reserve_event_tickets vs rsvp_event), and descriptions provide clear boundaries. Even closely related tools like list_booking_services and list_pricing_plans are differentiated by context.
All 26 tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (get_, list_, create_, search_, etc.), with no mixed conventions or vague verbs. This makes the tool set predictable and easy to navigate.
At 26 tools, the set is on the heavy side and exceeds the typical well-scoped range, but the diversity reflects a multi-featured directory covering bookings, events, store, reviews, forms, and more. Each tool appears to serve a distinct purpose, so the count is borderline rather than excessive.
The surface covers the core user workflows: search, view details, book services, reserve/RSVP events, request reservations, submit forms, and browse content. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no cancellation/update for bookings, no full blog post body), but these are workarounds and not critical for a consumer-facing directory.
