Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
eventbrite-mcp

eventbrite-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

eb_org_webhooks

Read-only

Retrieve an organization's registered webhooks and the actions each one subscribes to, with optional full payloads and pagination.

Instructions

List an organization's registered webhooks and the actions they subscribe to.

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

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds essentially nothing beyond restating the name – it does not mention pagination behavior (despite a continuation param existing) or auth requirements, so it earns little credit against the lowered bar.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

One efficient, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is well sized, though it is terse to the point that the sentence is doing minimal work.

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 simple read-only list tool with a fully documented 3-parameter schema and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose. Only minor gaps remain (pagination expectations, org_id source), and the schema covers continuation.

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%, including detailed text for the view enum and the continuation token, so the schema does all the work. The description contributes no additional parameter meaning; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('an organization's registered webhooks') plus the payload contents ('the actions they subscribe to'). This is unambiguous, though there are no sibling webhook tools to differentiate from, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of the org_id sourcing beyond what the schema already carries. Usage is only implied by the name.

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