Smart Calendars AI

reactivate_feed

Idempotent

Reactivate an existing feed free within account allowances. Does not reset the original editing window or modify events. publication.status reports calendar-file preparation, not subscription access. Check distribution_ready for access at the reported revision; use get_feed_status for current availability. These tools manage Smart Calendars feeds only; they cannot access mailboxes or start source monitoring, scheduled PDF checks or document refreshes. For requests solely for those unsupported actions, explain the limitation without reading feeds or substituting an edit. For unsupported mailbox requests, offer to work with schedule content the user chooses to provide instead. General ICS explanations need no account access. When sharing a feed or filtered_subscription with distribution_ready=true, offer "Open in calendar app" using that object’s HTTPS subscription_open_url (it redirects to webcal), and "Calendar options" using its subscription_options_url for Apple/default, Google, Outlook and copy-link choices. Retain subscription_url as a copyable HTTPS fallback. Prefer these HTTPS handoff links over putting subscription_webcal_url directly in chat, because some clients do not preserve clickable webcal links. If a handoff URL is absent, use the HTTPS subscription_url and dashboard subscription controls instead. Offer "View or edit" using the feed’s manage_url. For a filtered selection use the nested filtered_subscription links, not the unfiltered feed links. Use the returned URLs exactly; never invent or rewrite their host, path or token. Opening a link does not confirm a subscription; the user must confirm in their calendar app. Do not present inactive or unpublished feeds as ready to subscribe.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`feed_id`	Yes	Feed identity returned by a previous feed tool; used to address the selected calendar only.
`request_id`	Yes	Generate an opaque key for this save and reuse it unchanged for retries, to prevent duplicate changes. Not a user identifier, chat/session ID, or telemetry. Do not include personal data.
`expected_revision`	Yes	Last read feed revision; prevents overwriting concurrent edits.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important behavior: reactivation is free within account allowances, does not reset the original editing window or modify events, and publication.status reflects calendar-file preparation rather than subscription access. It also adds caution that opening a link does not confirm a subscription and that inactive feeds should not be presented as ready.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, but the description runs long and includes extensive sharing-link handoff guidance that is only tangentially related to reactivating a feed. For a three-parameter mutation tool, many sentences do not earn their place in this specific definition.

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?

The description covers the key context an agent needs: purpose, side-effect boundaries, status-field caveats, unsupported actions, and subscription readiness warnings. With annotations and a fully described schema, it is mostly complete, though it does not clearly describe what a successful reactivate_feed call returns.

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 feed_id, request_id, and expected_revision are already well documented in the schema. The description does not add meaningful parameter-level semantics beyond a vague reference to 'the reported revision', so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The first sentence names a specific verb and resource: reactivating an existing feed, with a scope note about account allowances. It is reasonably distinguishable from deactivate_feed by the word reactivate, but it does not explicitly contrast itself with apply_feed_changes or create_feed.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear routing guidance, including using get_feed_status for current availability and checking distribution_ready at the reported revision. It also explicitly excludes unsupported mailbox and source-monitoring requests, though it does not state when to prefer reactivate_feed over apply_feed_changes or deactivate_feed.

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

All Smart Calendars AI tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?