Skip to main content
Glama

Dostuff

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Events

events
Read-onlyIdempotent

Curated things-to-do / events for a DoStuff metro. Defaults to today; pass date and/or days to cover a window (e.g. a weekend). Optionally filter by category (music, art, performing-arts, comedy, food-drink, other-fun-deals) and free-only. Sorted by start time.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateNoStart date YYYY-MM-DD (default: today, US Eastern).
daysNoHow many days from the start date to include (1-7, default 1). Use 3 for a weekend.
limitNoMax events to return (1-200, default 50).
metroYesMetro slug: nyc, chicago, boston, austin, san-antonio, sf-bay. Use the metros tool to list.
categoryNoFilter by category, e.g. "music", "art", "comedy", "performing-arts", "food-drink".
free_onlyNoIf true, only return free events.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint false, so the description adds value by explaining concrete behavior: defaults to today, sorted by start time, and filtering options. No contradiction with annotations. The description is transparent and complementary.

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 concise, with three front-loaded sentences covering purpose, default behavior, windowing, and optional filters. Every sentence adds unique value and there is no redundancy or 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?

Given 6 parameters, 100% schema coverage, no output schema, and safe annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral and usage context. It omits details like pagination or response format, but for a read-only list tool, it is sufficiently complete for correct invocation and interpretation.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the description's role is reduced. However, it adds useful semantics beyond the schema: 'defaults to today', 'cover a window (e.g. a weekend)', and enumeration of valid categories (music, art, etc.). This enhances the agent's understanding of parameter usage.

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 clearly states it returns 'curated things-to-do / events for a DoStuff metro' and specifies default behavior, date windowing, category filtering, and sorting. It effectively distinguishes from siblings like 'metros' (which lists metros) and other search tools, making the purpose 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?

The description provides clear context on when to use: defaults to today, can cover a window with date/days, optional filters (category, free_only). It implies usage for event discovery. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternative tools, leaving slight room for confusion among the many sibling tools.

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

All Dostuff 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The set contains near-duplicate tools (ask_pipeworx_beta explicitly 'currently matches ask_pipeworx exactly') and a dense family of six polymarket_* tools whose boundaries are subtle, plus overlapping onboarding tools in discover_tools and suggest_questions. Detailed descriptions mitigate some confusion, but several tools are difficult to tell apart without reading their full text.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are lowercase snake_case and readable, with consistent prefix families (ask_pipeworx, polymarket_, pipeworx_), but the overall structure is mixed: bare verbs (remember, forget, subscribe), adjective+noun names (recent_alerts, recent_changes), and noun+noun domain tags (polymarket_edges, entity_profile) rather than a uniform verb_noun pattern.

Tool Count2/5

At 33 tools the set exceeds the 25-tool threshold and feels heavy, carrying an experimental duplicate of ask_pipeworx and a six-tool polymarket family that could plausibly be consolidated. The breadth reflects several unrelated domains bundled into one server rather than a focused scope.

Completeness3/5

The data-research core (ask, grounded, deep_research, profiles, comparisons, claim validation, entity resolution) and the prediction-market analysis suite are thoroughly covered, and memory plus subscription lifecycles are complete. However, the events domain the server is named for is thin (only events + metros), and the overall set lacks a single coherent purpose against which completeness can be cleanly judged.

Resources