Skip to main content
Glama
eventbrite-mcp

eventbrite-mcp

by chrischall

eb_org_orders

Read-only

List orders across an organization's events for organizers, with compact or full response shapes and continuation-based pagination.

Instructions

List orders across an organization's events (organizer side).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoResponse shape: "compact" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; "full" returns every field this server understands. compact strips image/avatar URLs from the response; "full" returns Eventbrite's payload untouched. No field projection on this tool: this server has no verified record of which Eventbrite fields matter here, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.
org_idYesOrganization id (from eb_my_organizations)
continuationNoPagination continuation token from a previous response

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / view
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Response shape: \"compact\" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; \"full\" returns every field this server understands. compact strips image/avatar URLs from the response; \"full\" returns Eventbrite's payload untouched. No field projection on this tool: this server has no verified record of which Eventbrite fields matter here, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.",
      +  "enum": [
      +    "compact",
      +    "full"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered and the bar is lower. The description adds that the listing spans an organization's events ('organizer side'), which is useful scoping context, but it says nothing about pagination behavior (despite a continuation param), result volume, or ordering. Minimal added value beyond structured data.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope qualifier is placed immediately after the core action. Nothing is wasted and the essential information comes first.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With no output schema, the description carries more of the burden, yet it only names the resource and scope. For an org-wide listing with pagination, it could note that results are paginated and must be traversed via 'continuation'. It is minimally sufficient for a safe read-only list operation but leaves the pagination workflow to the schema.

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 all three parameters, including the enum meaning of 'view' and the pagination role of 'continuation', are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 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 ('List') and resource ('orders') plus scope ('across an organization's events'), and the parenthetical '(organizer side)' implicitly separates it from the buyer-oriented eb_my_orders sibling. The phrase 'across an organization's events' also distinguishes it from the single-event eb_event_orders. It falls short of naming alternatives explicitly, but the resource and scope are unambiguous.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance; the only routing signal is the '(organizer side)' parenthetical, which implies this is the organizer-facing counterpart to eb_my_orders. An agent can infer the context but must reason it out rather than being told. Adequate but with a clear gap on alternatives.

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