Skip to main content
Glama

get_event_tickets

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.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
event_slugYesEvent slug from list_events.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states what is returned (names, prices, sale status, availability count) and the input requirement, but it does not disclose any side effects, auth needs, or rate limits. For a read-only tool, this is adequate but not rich. Score 3 is fair.

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?

Two sentences, each earning its place. Front-loaded with the action and result, and the second sentence adds the source hint and return details. No fluff.

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 simple single-parameter read tool, the description is sufficient: it states the input source, the specific outputs, and the event domain (Wix Events). No output schema exists, but the description covers the return values. It doesn't mention edge cases (e.g., events with no tickets), but for a simple getter this is acceptable.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the parameter. The description adds that the slug comes from list_events, reinforcing the schema. It doesn't add syntax or format details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 has a specific verb ('Get') plus a specific resource ('ticket types and prices for a specific event') and clearly distinguishes from siblings by naming the event slug source (list_events). It also lists the exact data returned, making it unambiguous.

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?

It gives a clear prerequisite: 'Pass the event slug from list_events.' This implies use after list_events and before ticket purchase. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the sibling set includes reserve_event_tickets, so the description implies when to use this vs another tool. Clear context, minor exclusion guidance.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: booking services, restaurant reservations, event tickets, and RSVPs are all clearly separated by domain and described with explicit use cases. Similarly, search_places, search_dishes, and get_restaurant_menus cover different granularities of place/menu lookup. The descriptions include guidance on when to use each tool, eliminating ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., list_*, get_*, create_*, search_*). While a few verbs like 'request' and 'rsvp' differ, they accurately reflect the action's semantics and do not break the overall consistency. The naming makes the tool's purpose predictable from its name.

Tool Count4/5

At 28 tools, this is a large set, but it serves a broad multi-domain directory (places, events, movies, store, bookings, content, etc.). Each tool covers a distinct feature or resource, and there are no redundant tools. The count is at the upper boundary but appropriate for the server's comprehensive scope.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle for the directory's main domains: search/discover places, view details, menus, reviews, book services, reserve/RSVP events, browse movies/showtimes, list products, access content (blog, guides, FAQs), submit forms, and check loyalty. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations for the stated purpose. The inclusion of pairing tools like list_forms→submit_form and get_availability→create_booking shows deliberate workflow completeness.

Resources