lacita

update_calendar

Update calendar settings including name, description, duration, buffers, reminders, etc.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Calendar name
`duration`	No	Session duration in minutes (15-480)
`isActive`	No	Whether calendar is active
`minNotice`	No	Minimum booking notice in minutes
`calendarId`	Yes	The calendar ID
`maxAdvance`	No	Maximum advance booking in minutes
`bufferAfter`	No	Buffer after appointment in minutes
`description`	No	Calendar description
`bufferBefore`	No	Buffer before appointment in minutes
`conflictMode`	No	Conflict checking mode
`defaultLocation`	No	Default location for appointments
`remindersEnabled`	No	Enable/disable appointment reminders
`conflictCalendarIds`	No	Calendar IDs to check for conflicts (when conflictMode is "selected")
`minGapBetweenAppointments`	No	Minimum gap between appointments in minutes

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and open-world behavior. The description adds only the list of field examples but does not clarify whether updates are partial or full, or any side effects. It doesn't contradict annotations, but adds minimal behavioral detail.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded, no fluff. It efficiently states the purpose.

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?

Despite a detailed schema, the description is sparse for a tool with 14 parameters. It lacks guidance on partial vs full update behavior, conditional dependencies between parameters (e.g., conflictCalendarIds with conflictMode), and return value expectations. This could lead to incorrect invocation.

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 has 100% coverage for 14 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions several fields but doesn't add any semantic information beyond what the schema descriptions already provide.

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 description clearly identifies the action ('Update') and the resource ('calendar settings'), listing representative fields. It distinguishes from siblings like create_calendar and delete_calendar, though it doesn't explicitly separate from other update_* tools.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus update_booking_settings or update_calendar_weekly_availability. The context is somewhat implied by the name, but there are no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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

All lacita tools Inspect

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

A3.5/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Most tools are clearly distinct, but update_calendar overlaps with specialized tools like update_booking_settings, update_confirmation_settings, and the reminder management tools (add/delete/get reminders). This creates ambiguity about which tool to use for modifying specific settings such as buffers or reminders, though descriptions help clarify the intended scope.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 28 tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., create_calendar, get_appointments, update_contact). The verbs are predictable (add, cancel, create, delete, get, reschedule, send, update), making the API easy to navigate.

Tool Count2/5

With 28 tools, the set exceeds the 25+ threshold typically considered too many. While each tool serves a legitimate purpose, the high number is overwhelming and likely includes more granularity than necessary; some settings tools could be consolidated.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle of calendars, appointments, and contacts, including availability, overrides, reminders, confirmation settings, and notifications. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations; cancellation and rescheduling handle appointment changes, and send_invitation covers creation.

Resources

Need Help?