Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

hunchful

by io.hunchful
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Events: sign up or cancel

rsvp_event
DestructiveIdempotent

Sign up for a channel event, or cancel a spot, only with their own answer. Signing up is their own tap (you get a card that opens the event). Cancelling gives the spot away: ask, then confirm: true.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
answerYes"sign_up" or "cancel".
confirmNoCancelling gives the spot away: true once they said yes.
eventIdYesFrom list_upcoming (kind event or hosting) or a link …/channel/<id>?post=<eventId>.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Previous value: -"Cancelling gives the spot away: true once the person confirmed. Example: true"New value: +"Cancelling gives the spot away: true once they said yes."
    • changedInput schema / properties / eventId / description
      Previous value: -"The event's id (eventId) — from list_upcoming (kind event or hosting) or a channel event link …/channel/<id>?post=<eventId>."New value: +"From list_upcoming (kind event or hosting) or a link …/channel/<id>?post=<eventId>."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
-  "additionalProperties": false,
-  "properties": {
-    "eventId": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "itemId": {
-      "type": [
-        "string",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    },
-    "myStatus": {
-      "type": [
-        "string",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    },
-    "note": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "spotsLeft": {
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    "status": {
-      "enum": [
-        "cancelled",
-        "draft",
-        "unchanged"
-      ],
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "title": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "url": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "whenText": {
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "status",
-    "eventId",
-    "title",
-    "whenText",
-    "myStatus",
-    "spotsLeft",
-    "itemId",
-    "url",
-    "note"
-  ],
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses the key behavioral constraints: the user must act themselves, signing up produces a card that opens the event, and cancelling gives the spot away and therefore requires an explicit confirmation. This adds meaningful consent and consequence context on top of destructiveHint=true.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The definition is short and front-loads the action and consent requirement. The three sentences are efficient, though the phrasing 'only with their own answer' and 'their own tap' is slightly informal and could be clearer.

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 three-parameter mutation tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, consent requirement, cancellation consequence, and confirmation flow. A little more detail about the return behavior on sign-up or the distinction from event listing tools would make it fully complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description reinforces the need to ask before passing confirm: true, but it mostly duplicates what the schema already states and does not add new detail about eventId retrieval or the answer enum values.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Sign up for a channel event, or cancel a spot.' It makes both supported actions explicit and distinguishes the tool from generic event creation or listing siblings.

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 clear when-to-use guidance by requiring the action to come from the user's own answer and by instructing the agent to ask before cancelling. It does not name sibling alternatives such as events or list_upcoming, so the routing guidance is strong but not complete.

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

All hunchful toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources