Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

luma_category

Fetch public category details and featured/timeline calendars for a Luma event category by its slug, such as tech or arts.

Instructions

Get a Luma event category. Returns public category details and its public featured/timeline calendars. The slug must be one of family, books, games, tech, food, ai, running, arts, climate, fitness, wellness, or crypto.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "slug": "<slug>"
    },
    "name": "luma_category"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesLuma category slug

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that both category details and calendars are 'public' and that the operation is a read ('Get ... Returns'), which is useful, but it says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, or what happens with an invalid slug.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Purpose is front-loaded and the first two sentences earn their place, but the third sentence duplicates the enum already present in the input schema, consuming space for zero informational gain.

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 single-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description covers what the tool fetches and roughly what comes back, which is enough for correct invocation. Only the sibling-routing and failure-mode details are missing.

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% and the enum is fully enumerated in the schema, so the description's restatement of the twelve allowed slugs adds essentially no meaning beyond the structured data. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a Luma event category') and adds what it returns (public category details plus featured/timeline calendars). It does not name or contrast with the obvious siblings (luma_categories, luma_category_events), so differentiation is left to inference.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: the mention of returning featured/timeline calendars hints this is the detail lookup rather than the events listing, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or reference to an alternative sibling tool.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools