Fetch StubHub's current search suggestions to see changing performers, groupings, and categories highlighted in its search UI; no query parameters required.
List StubHub's current search suggestions. Returns StubHub's short, changing list of performers, groupings, and categories currently suggested by its search UI. It takes no query parameters.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the list is 'short' and 'changing' (dynamic, small payload) and confirms no query parameters, but it never states that this is a read-only operation or describes any rate-limit/refresh behavior.
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 substantive sentences with the purpose front-loaded, plus a short clarifying sentence on parameters. Slight redundancy in restating 'search suggestions' and the no-param note, but nothing is wasted.
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, no-param list tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (performers, groupings, categories) and that it requires no input. Only the return structure is left unspecified, which is acceptable given no output schema exists.
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?
Zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description explicitly confirms 'It takes no query parameters,' which matches the empty schema and removes any ambiguity about passing arguments.
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?
States a specific verb (List) and resource (StubHub's current search suggestions) and clarifies what the suggestions contain: performers, groupings, and categories. Clear enough to distinguish from a general search tool, though it never names a sibling like stubhub_trending or stubhub_explore to sharpen the boundary.
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?
There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no alternatives named. The phrase 'currently suggested by its search UI' hints at the intent, but the agent is left to infer whether this differs from stubhub_trending, stubhub_categories, or stubhub_explore.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.