Skip to main content
Glama
NotoriousArnav

EventHorizon MCP Server

register_for_event

Register users for events by providing an event ID and optional form answers. This tool handles attendee sign-ups through the EventHorizon platform.

Instructions

Register the current user for an event.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
event_idYesThe ID of the event to register for
answersNoAnswers to registration form questions (if any)

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool handler function for 'register_for_event'. It retrieves the API client, calls registerForEvent on it with event_id and answers, formats the registration response, or returns an error.
    async ({ event_id, answers }) => {
      try {
        const apiClient = getClient();
        const registration = await apiClient.registerForEvent(event_id, answers || {});
        return {
          content: [{ type: 'text', text: `Successfully registered!\n\n${formatRegistration(registration)}` }]
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return {
          content: [{ type: 'text', text: `Error: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)}` }],
          isError: true
        };
      }
    }
  • Zod input schema for the 'register_for_event' tool, defining event_id (required number) and optional answers (record).
    {
      event_id: z.number().describe('The ID of the event to register for'),
      answers: z.record(z.unknown()).optional().describe('Answers to registration form questions (if any)')
    },
  • src/index.ts:204-225 (registration)
    Registration of the 'register_for_event' tool with the MCP server using server.tool(), including description, input schema, and handler function.
    server.tool(
      'register_for_event',
      'Register the current user for an event.',
      {
        event_id: z.number().describe('The ID of the event to register for'),
        answers: z.record(z.unknown()).optional().describe('Answers to registration form questions (if any)')
      },
      async ({ event_id, answers }) => {
        try {
          const apiClient = getClient();
          const registration = await apiClient.registerForEvent(event_id, answers || {});
          return {
            content: [{ type: 'text', text: `Successfully registered!\n\n${formatRegistration(registration)}` }]
          };
        } catch (error) {
          return {
            content: [{ type: 'text', text: `Error: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)}` }],
            isError: true
          };
        }
      }
    );
  • Helper method in EventHorizonClient that performs the actual API call to register for an event via POST to /api/events/{eventId}/register/.
    async registerForEvent(eventId: number, answers: Record<string, unknown> = {}): Promise<Registration> {
      try {
        const response: AxiosResponse<Registration> = await this.client.post(`/api/events/${eventId}/register/`, { answers });
        return response.data;
      } catch (error) {
        throw new Error(`Failed to register for event ${eventId}: ${getErrorMessage(error)}`);
      }
    }
  • TypeScript interface defining the Registration object returned by the API, used in the tool's response formatting.
    export interface Registration {
      id: number;
      event: Event | number;
      user: User | number;
      status: 'pending' | 'approved' | 'waitlisted' | 'cancelled';
      answers: Record<string, unknown>;
      registered_at: string;
      updated_at: string;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('register') which implies a write operation, but doesn't cover critical aspects like authentication requirements, error conditions (e.g., event full, registration closed), or what happens on success (e.g., confirmation details). This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, clear sentence that efficiently communicates the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the main action and doesn't waste space on redundant information, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of a registration tool (a write operation with potential side effects), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after registration (e.g., confirmation details, errors), authentication needs, or how it interacts with sibling tools like 'manage_registration'. For a mutation tool with no structured support, more context is needed.

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 schema already documents both parameters ('event_id' and 'answers') adequately. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, such as format examples for 'answers' or constraints on 'event_id'. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('register') and target ('the current user for an event'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'unregister_from_event' by specifying registration rather than cancellation, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'manage_registration' which might handle similar functionality.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'manage_registration' or 'unregister_from_event'. It mentions the current user but doesn't specify prerequisites (e.g., user must be logged in) or contextual constraints (e.g., event must be open for registration).

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/NotoriousArnav/EventHorizon-MCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server