Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
eventbrite-mcp

eventbrite-mcp

by prmichaelsen
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_format

Retrieve an Eventbrite format by ID to identify an event type, such as a seminar, workshop, or concert, for use in event management workflows.

Instructions

Retrieve a Format by ID.

ENDPOINT: GET /formats/{format_id}/

Format represents event type (e.g., seminar, workshop, concert).

AUTHENTICATION: Requires: Authorization: Bearer PERSONAL_OAUTH_TOKEN

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "format_id": "<format_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_format"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
format_idYesFormat ID (required)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.6

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the safety burden. It discloses the authentication requirement (Bearer token), which is useful, but does not state read-only nature explicitly or describe failure modes (e.g., 404 on unknown ID).

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (description, endpoint, auth) and front-loaded purpose. Slightly verbose with headers but no wasted sentences.

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-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, endpoint, and auth. It omits return value details, but the absence of an output schema means this is a minor gap.

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 the single format_id parameter. The description adds no additional syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, making baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('a Format by ID'), and clarifies what a Format is ('event type, e.g., seminar, workshop, concert'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_venue or get_category.

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?

Usage is implied by naming the endpoint and required ID, but the description offers no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of the sibling 'list_formats' as an alternative for enumeration.

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