Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

evite-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

evite_get_event

Read-only

Retrieve complete details for a single Evite event by its ID, including event settings, location, and more.

Instructions

Get a single Evite event detail (GET /services/event/v1/{id}): event, settings, location, and more.

Input Schema

TableJSON 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 Evite's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which Evite fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.
event_idYesEvite event id (event_id from evite_list_events).

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 changedv0.8.0
    • 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 Evite's payload untouched. No field projection: this server has no verified record of which Evite fields matter, and inventing one would risk dropping a field a caller needs.",
+  "enum": [
+    "compact",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds that it returns event, settings, location, and more, which is useful but not deeply behavioral (no error handling, rate limits, or field-level detail). It doesn't contradict annotations and adds minimal context beyond them.

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 sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists the key resource types. There is zero fluff, and the HTTP endpoint is a useful extra. Every word earns its place.

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 single-event read with readOnlyHint and full schema coverage, the description is largely complete. It states what the response contains (event, settings, location) though 'and more' is vague. Since there is no output schema, a bit more specificity about returned fields would be helpful, but the core usage is clear and sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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%, with both event_id and view fully documented. The view parameter has a detailed explanation of compact vs full behavior. The tool description itself doesn't discuss parameters, but the schema carries the burden, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('single Evite event detail') and lists what it returns (event, settings, location, and more). It clearly distinguishes from list events by the singular scope, and includes the HTTP endpoint for precision. This is unambiguous and differentiates from sibling tools like evite_list_events.

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?

The description implies this is for fetching a single event but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. The schema hint that event_id comes from evite_list_events gives some context, but the description itself offers no explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternatives. It's adequate but not explicit.

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