Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

evite-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

evite_list_guests

Read-only

Retrieve the guest list for an Evite event, including names, RSVP responses, head counts, and delivery status.

Instructions

List the guests for an Evite event (GET /services/event/v1/{id}/guests/): name, RSVP response, head counts, delivery status, 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 supply readOnlyHint=true, and the description's GET endpoint reinforces that this is a safe read with no side effects. It adds the return-field expectation but does not disclose pagination, limits, ordering, or other behavioral details; this is acceptable but not rich.

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?

One sentence that front-loads the action, resource, endpoint, and key return fields with no filler. The empty title is not penalized because the description itself carries the content.

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 listing tool, the description plus fully documented schema is sufficient: the agent knows what it does, what it returns, and that event_id comes from evite_list_events (per the schema). The only gap is explicit routing away from alternate summary/guest tools, which is more of a usage-guidance concern.

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%; event_id and view are already well documented in the schema, including the compact/full distinction. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond pointing at the endpoint, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair ('List the guests for an Evite event') and anchors it to the exact endpoint. It also names the return content (name, RSVP response, head counts, delivery status), making the tool's purpose unambiguous against siblings like evite_rsvp_summary or evite_add_guest.

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 the use case—when you need the guest roster for an event—but provides no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or named alternatives. An agent must infer the choice from the presence of sibling tools like evite_rsvp_summary rather than being told directly.

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