bulk_create_promo_codesCreate up to 500 promo codes on a live event in one call (duplicates and invalid rows skipped with reasons). Counts against the event's promo-code plan cap. Requires event_id; you must be a host.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| codes | Yes | ||
| event_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses important behaviors beyond annotations: counts against plan cap, skips duplicates/invalid rows with reasons, maximum of 500 codes, and host requirement. No contradictions with annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences conveying all critical information without redundancy. Essential details are front-loaded and each sentence adds value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite good annotations and schema structure, the description lacks details on the complex array parameter and does not mention return values. Given no output schema, the description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand usage.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema has 0% description coverage. Description only explains event_id and the high-level concept, but provides no details about the 'codes' array structure, its required sub-fields (code, discount_type, etc.), or their constraints.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly specifies the action (create), resource (promo codes), and scope (up to 500 on a live event). It differentiates from sibling tools like 'create_promo_code' by highlighting batch capacity and skip behavior.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides clear context: use for bulk creation on live events, requires event_id and host status. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives or provide exclusion criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Many tools have overlapping purposes, particularly the generic create_production_item vs specific add_* tools (e.g., add_role, add_meal). This creates ambiguity, as agents may struggle to choose between generic and specific counterparts. Additionally, similar verbs like 'add', 'create', and 'bulk_create' blur boundaries.
Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (add_guest, list_events), but there are inconsistencies: 'bulk_create_promo_codes' instead of 'create_bulk_promo_codes', mix of 'list' and 'get' (list_events vs get_account_status), and varied verbs like 'set', 'update', 'delete', 'archive', 'unarchive', 'reorder'. Overall pattern recognizable but not uniform.
115 tools is excessive for most domains, including event management. While the domain is complex, this granularity overwhelms agents and makes selection difficult. The tool count far exceeds typical well-scoped servers (3-15), indicating poor abstraction.
The tool set covers an extensive range of event management activities: events, tickets, guests, affiliates, discounts, production items, forms, communities, sponsors, and more. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct event deletion, only cancellation), but overall the surface is comprehensive for the stated purpose.