Skip to main content
Glama

Nevent MCP

by io.github.nevent-dev

nevent_help

Read-only

Get guidance when you are unsure which tool to call or how to handle an error. Returns structured markdown for the requested topic. Call with topic="workflows" for common patterns, topic="errors" for error code meanings, topic="tenants" for multi-tenant guidance, or topic= like "paid_media" / "analytics" / "segments". Omit topic to get an index of all available topics.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topicNoTopic to get guidance on. Omit to get an index of all available topics. Values: workflows | errors | tenants | analytics | segments | campaigns | templates | deliverability | paid_media | short_urls | media

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating it returns structured markdown and that omitting the topic yields an index of all topics. No contradictions with the annotations.

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?

Three sentences, no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, concrete topic examples are compact, and the fallback behavior (omit topic) is stated at the end. Every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a single-optional-parameter help tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it explains the return format, the available topic categories, example values, and the index behavior. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the parameter is well documented already. The description adds value beyond the enum by explaining what each key topic category means (workflows, errors, tenants) and by giving examples like paid_media/analytics/segments, which helps the agent map intent to the right topic value.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get guidance') and clearly defines the resource: guidance for tool selection and error handling. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling domain tools by positioning itself as the meta-help tool, so an agent can tell it apart from the many analytics/campaign/segment tools without inspecting them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly states when to use this tool: when unsure which tool to call or how to handle an error. It also provides concrete topic routing examples (workflows, errors, tenants, paid_media, analytics, segments) and tells the agent to omit topic to get an index, which is clear guidance for a help tool.

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

All Nevent MCP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most domain groups are distinct, but the campaign reporting cluster has three tools returning overlapping engagement metrics (get_campaign, get_campaign_metrics, campaign_report), and paid_ads_status vs paid_ads_health have fuzzy boundaries. The detailed descriptions mitigate but do not eliminate the risk of an agent calling the wrong tool.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names use the nevent_ prefix and snake_case, and most CRUD operations follow verb_noun. However, several tools reverse the order or drop the verb entirely (segment_preview, segment_execute, campaign_report, paid_ads_status, analytics_query), making the convention mixed but still readable.

Tool Count1/5

With 59 tools, this is far above the 25+ 'too many' threshold and falls into the 50+ extreme range. The broad domain coverage explains some of the size, but for an agent the set is likely to be overwhelming and harder to navigate than a more focused server.

Completeness3/5

The core marketing workflow (segments, templates, campaign creation, quote, schedule, metrics) is covered, but there is no way to update, cancel, or delete a campaign, and templates and segments lack delete operations. These are notable lifecycle gaps that agents will hit when users want to change or clean up resources.

Resources