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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains what data is returned (names, prices, sale status, quantity left), but does not mention error conditions, authorization, or side effects.
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, no fluff. The first sentence states purpose, the second gives parameter guidance and return summary. Concise and well-structured.
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 tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description covers the necessary information: parameter source and return content. Could mention handling of missing events, but overall adequate.
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 coverage is 100%, and the description essentially repeats the schema's parameter description ('Event slug from list_events'). It adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.
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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'ticket types and prices for a specific event', and specifies the domain 'Wix Events'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like reserve_event_tickets or list_events.
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 tells the agent to pass the event slug from list_events, providing a clear prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use this tool.
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 action and domain, with clear descriptions preventing confusion. Similar tools like create_booking, request_reservation, reserve_event_tickets, and rsvp_event are differentiated by service type and workflow.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., create_booking, get_availability, list_categories), ensuring predictability and ease of use for agents.
With 28 tools, the set is fairly large but appropriate for a comprehensive neighborhood directory covering multiple domains (places, events, booking, store, forms, etc.). Each tool serves a distinct purpose without redundancy.
The tool surface covers the full lifecycle of common user needs: search and discovery, detailed info, reservations, purchases, and interactions (forms, FAQs). No obvious gaps for the described purpose of a neighborhood directory.