Retrieve upcoming Ticketmaster events for a specific venue by numeric venue ID, with optional sorting by relevance or date and pagination.
List a venue's Ticketmaster events. Returns upcoming Ticketmaster events at one venue. The sort enum accepts relevance and date.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Numeric Ticketmaster venue id | |
| page | No | Zero-based page (0-49) | |
| sort | No | Result order |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Input schema / properties / sort / enumAdded value: +[
+ "relevance",
+ "date"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read operation ('Returns upcoming events') but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination limits, rate limits, handling of invalid venue IDs, or whether the response includes full event details or just summaries. Without annotations, this is a moderate gap for a simple read tool.
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 with zero redundancies. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the only extra detail (sort enum) is a single concise clause. Every word earns its place.
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?
No output schema exists and no annotations, so the description must explain what the caller gets. It only says it returns upcoming events, without specifying the structure, any pagination behavior (despite a 'page' parameter), or constraints on the id (though the schema notes it's numeric). For a tool with 3 parameters, this is under-specified and leaves an agent guessing about response format.
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?
The schema covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), including the enum values for 'sort'. The description adds only a redundant note about the sort enum ('accepts relevance and date') which is already in the schema. It does not explain 'id' or 'page' beyond what the schema provides, so it adds minimal value.
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's function: 'List a venue's Ticketmaster events' and reinforces it with 'Returns upcoming Ticketmaster events at one venue.' It specifies the resource (venue's events) and the action (list), and inherently distinguishes itself from search-oriented siblings like ticketmaster_search_events or ticketmaster_trending_attractions by focusing on a single venue's catalog.
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 use when you have a specific venue id and want its events, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or conditions when not to use this tool. No guidance is given on how to choose between this and other Ticketmaster tools (e.g., ticketmaster_venue_enhanced_details or ticketmaster_search_events). The intended usage is inferable but not explicitly stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.