add_affiliate_codeExtend an affiliate to another ticket tier — adds the tier to their promo code with its own discount and optional commission. Requires event_id + affiliate_id + ticket_class_id + discount; you must be a host.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| event_id | Yes | ||
| affiliate_id | Yes | ||
| discount_type | Yes | ||
| discount_value | Yes | ||
| commission_type | No | ||
| ticket_class_id | Yes | ||
| commission_value | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Description adds auth requirement ('you must be a host') beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., overwriting existing tiers), idempotency, or response shape. Annotations are minimal, so description carries some burden but leaves gaps.
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: first states purpose and key feature, second lists requirements. No redundant words, efficient and front-loaded.
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 no output schema and 7 params, description covers purpose, required params, and auth but lacks success behavior, optional commission details, and usage differentiation from sibling tools. Adequate but not comprehensive.
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 description coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It mentions required parameters (event_id, affiliate_id, ticket_class_id, discount) and optional commission, but does not explain each parameter's meaning (e.g., discount_type vs discount_value, commission_type). This provides marginal addition but insufficient guidance for 7 parameters.
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 'extend' and resource 'affiliate to another ticket tier', distinguishing it from siblings like 'add_affiliate' or 'create_promo_code'. It also lists required parameters and a prerequisite (host status), 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.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage when adding a tier to an affiliate's promo code but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'create_promo_code' or 'update_affiliate_commission'. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned.
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.
Many tools have overlapping purposes, particularly the generic create_production_item vs specific add_* tools (e.g., add_role, add_meal). This creates ambiguity, as agents may struggle to choose between generic and specific counterparts. Additionally, similar verbs like 'add', 'create', and 'bulk_create' blur boundaries.
Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (add_guest, list_events), but there are inconsistencies: 'bulk_create_promo_codes' instead of 'create_bulk_promo_codes', mix of 'list' and 'get' (list_events vs get_account_status), and varied verbs like 'set', 'update', 'delete', 'archive', 'unarchive', 'reorder'. Overall pattern recognizable but not uniform.
115 tools is excessive for most domains, including event management. While the domain is complex, this granularity overwhelms agents and makes selection difficult. The tool count far exceeds typical well-scoped servers (3-15), indicating poor abstraction.
The tool set covers an extensive range of event management activities: events, tickets, guests, affiliates, discounts, production items, forms, communities, sponsors, and more. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct event deletion, only cancellation), but overall the surface is comprehensive for the stated purpose.