What a Plan! — MCP Server
Server Details
Descubre eventos en España: filtra por texto, categoría, ubicación, precio y fecha. 38 categorías.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 3.8/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.
Each tool has a clear, distinct purpose: search for events, list categories, and get event details by slug. No overlap in functionality.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: search_events, list_categories, get_event.
With only 3 tools, the server is minimal but covers the essential read operations for event discovery. Slightly low but acceptable for its focused scope.
The tools cover the core discovery workflow: search with filters, list categories, and get details. Missing advanced operations like bulk listing or sorting, but sufficient for basic use.
Available Tools
3 toolsget_eventAInspect
Obtiene los detalles completos de un evento específico por su slug. Usa esta herramienta después de search_events para obtener información detallada.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Slug único del evento (ej: "concierto-rock-leon-2026"). Obligatorio. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It is a straightforward read operation, but doesn't disclose error handling, authentication needs, or what happens if slug is invalid.
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 unnecessary words, front-loaded with purpose then usage hint. Efficient and clear.
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?
For a simple tool with 1 parameter and no output schema, the description is sufficient. Could mention behavior on missing slug, but overall complete enough.
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%, so baseline 3. Description adds no new meaning beyond the schema's parameter description, just reiterates the slug usage.
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 it retrieves complete details of a specific event by slug, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by indicating it is used after search_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?
Explicitly advises using after search_events, which provides clear usage context. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but sufficient for this simple tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_categoriesAInspect
Lista todas las categorías de planes disponibles en What a Plan! (ej: Música en Directo, Teatro, Gastronomía, Deportes, etc.)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as data freshness, caching, or idempotency. For a listing tool, the absence of such context leaves the agent uninformed about potential side effects or performance characteristics.
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?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that immediately states the action and provides examples. It is concise and front-loaded with essential information.
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?
The tool has no parameters and no output schema, so the description adequately covers its purpose and scope. It provides enough context for an agent to understand what the tool does without additional details.
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?
With zero parameters in the input schema, the description naturally adds no parameter information. However, given the schema coverage is 100% and there are no parameters to describe, the baseline score of 4 is appropriate.
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 tool lists all plan categories and provides concrete examples (Música en Directo, Teatro, etc.). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools get_event and search_events, which focus on 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 implicitly indicates when to use the tool (to get all categories) but does not provide explicit context about when not to use it or alternatives. Since there are no sibling tools returning categories, the guidance is adequate but lacks thoroughness.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_eventsAInspect
Busca planes y eventos en What a Plan! usando múltiples filtros. Usa esta herramienta cuando alguien pregunte por planes, eventos, actividades, o qué hacer. Para filtrar por ubicación, proporciona coordenadas lat/lng y radio en metros (puedes determinar coordenadas desde nombres de ciudades). Ejemplos de consultas: "planes en León para niños", "conciertos gratis este fin de semana", "qué hacer mañana en Valladolid"
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lat | No | Latitud del centro de búsqueda (ej: 42.5987 para León). Proporciónala SEMPRE que sepas la ubicación. | |
| lng | No | Longitud del centro de búsqueda (ej: -5.5669 para León). Proporciónala junto con lat. | |
| city | No | Nombre de ciudad como fallback si no puedes determinar coordenadas (menos preciso que lat/lng) | |
| limit | No | Número máximo de resultados (default: 20, máx: 50) | |
| radius | No | Radio de búsqueda en metros (default: 10000 = 10km). Usa 20000 para área metropolitana. | |
| search | No | Palabras clave en título o descripción (ej: "niños", "rock", "gratis", "gastronomía") | |
| category | No | Nombre o slug de categoría (ej: "Música en Directo", "musica-en-directo") | |
| end_date | No | Fecha máxima en formato YYYY-MM-DD (ej: "2026-06-07" para fin de semana) | |
| max_price | No | Precio máximo (ej: 20) | |
| min_price | No | Precio mínimo (ej: 0 para gratis) | |
| start_date | No | Fecha mínima en formato YYYY-MM-DD (ej: "2026-06-05") |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It only describes the filtering capability but omits behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, authentication needs, rate limits, sorting, pagination, or whether it modifies data. A search tool should at least mention it returns a list of matching events.
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?
Description is brief but packs key information: purpose, usage guidance, location tips, and example queries. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but overall efficient.
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?
Despite 11 parameters and no output schema, the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., list of event objects, fields). It also lacks details on default behavior (sorting, pagination). Incomplete for a complex search tool.
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%, so every parameter already has a description. The tool description adds context (e.g., emphasizing lat/lng precision, examples), but does not significantly expand on schema meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 tool searches for plans/events on What a Plan! with multiple filters. It distinguishes itself from siblings (get_event for single event, list_categories) by focusing on searching and filtering.
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?
Explicitly says 'use this tool when someone asks about plans, events, activities, or what to do.' Provides guidance on when to use lat/lng vs city and gives example queries. Does not explicitly state exclusions, but context implies it's for multi-result searches.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!