Skip to main content
Glama

Chronary

by ai.chronary

find_meeting_time

Find slots when multiple agents are free across Chronary calendars and any human calendars authorized for each agent. This tool is fail-closed: always inspect availability_state and warnings before using slots. Accepts agents/start/end or their aliases.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endNoSearch range end (ISO 8601). Alias: end_time.
startNoSearch range start (ISO 8601). Alias: start_time.
agentsNoArray of agent IDs to find common free time for. All agents must be free during the returned slots. Alias: agent_ids.
durationNoRequested slot length (15m/30m/45m/1h/2h). Preferred over the deprecated slot_duration. Defaults to 30m.
end_timeNoAlias for `end` (matches REST events naming).
agent_idsNoAlias for `agents` (matches REST/scheduling-proposal naming).
calendarsNoAdditional shared calendar IDs to treat as busy
start_timeNoAlias for `start` (matches REST events naming).
include_busyNoInclude per-agent busy blocks in response
slot_durationNoDeprecated alias for `duration` — minimum slot length. Prefer `duration`.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'fail-closed' behavior and to inspect fields, but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, what happens on errors, or how it handles missing calendars. The safety note adds some value but leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and includes a key usage warning. Every sentence earns its place.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity (10 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too brief. It fails to explain output structure (availability_state, warnings), optional parameters like 'calendars' or 'include_busy', or how results are returned. This leaves the AI agent with inadequate context to use the tool 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so each parameter is documented. The description only briefly mentions parameter aliases, adding little beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already provides sufficient meaning.

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 clearly states the tool finds free time slots across multiple agents' calendars, using a specific verb ('Find slots') and resource ('when multiple agents are free'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_availability' (single agent) and 'create_event' (creates 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 includes a critical usage hint ('fail-closed: always inspect availability_state and warnings') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_availability' or 'resolve_proposal'. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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

All Chronary 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action, with clear descriptions that differentiate overlapping operations like cancel_event vs release_event and find_meeting_time vs get_availability.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 54 tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., create_calendar, list_events, delete_webhook), with no mixing of styles or vague verbs.

Tool Count2/5

With 54 tools, the server is over-scoped; the rubric considers 25+ tools as 'too many' for typical purposes, making navigation and selection harder without justification for such granularity.

Completeness5/5

The toolset provides full CRUD for agents, calendars, events, booking pages, proposals, webhooks, and iCal subscriptions, plus specialized operations like hold management, proposal resolution, and admin functions, leaving no obvious gaps.

Resources