Skip to main content
Glama

Find a time for a circle

circles_free_times_find
Read-only

Find when everyone in one of the person's circles is free: each stretch of a window that no member's busy time touches and that is at least as long as the meeting, in the zone the call names, else the person's own - the same whichever member asks, save for a member with no calendar connected, counted by the asker's own polls. The calendars each member owns and counts as busy - never one someone else shared with them - are read through that member's own connection as the call is made, and come back under busy only as when that member is busy - the circle's owner named owner, every other member by the address invited - never what an event says. An event holds its time as its provider's own free/busy shows it: on Google unless shown as available or declined - an invitation not yet answered or answered maybe included - and on Outlook only when shown busy or away, so an Outlook tentative answer leaves its time free; a cancelled event holds none. An all-day event holding time holds its whole day in its member's time zone; no one's stored working hours or other preferences apply, only the hours and weekdays the call names, in the answer's zone; limit keeps the earliest stretches, and the search keeps to the window's first 365 days. A member none of whose calendars could be read is named under unknown, and one only some of whose could under readInPart, their busy time read counted; either's busy time may fall inside a stretch. A member with no calendar connected counts as free only at the times they ticked in the person's own polls for this circle, and until they answer one is named under noCalendar - polls_create naming the circle asks them. On the person's own circle each address invited that has not joined is named under notJoined and counts the same way once it answers such a poll. Anyone counted by polls whose answers tick no time in the window is named under tickedNothing. Each stretch names under members every other member's own time for it in the zone they stored, marked unusual where any of it falls outside 09:00-18:00 or on a Saturday or Sunday there. circles_list names each circle's id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesEnd of the window, excluded, with its offset.
fromYesStart of the window, included, with its offset, e.g. 2026-10-12T09:00:00+01:00.
hoursNoOnly these hours of each day, e.g. 10:00-16:00 or 09:00-12:00, 14:00-17:00.
limitNoAt most this many stretches, the earliest.
circleYesThe circle's id, as circles_list names it.
minutesNoMeeting length in minutes; the stored one where omitted.
timeZoneNoAn IANA zone such as Europe/London the answer is given in; the stored one where omitted.
weekdaysNoOnly these days of the week.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only supply readOnly/openWorld/destructive hints; the description goes far beyond them, disclosing which calendars are read and through whose connection, Google vs Outlook busy semantics (tentative/cancelled/all-day events), the 365-day search cap, and the unknown/readInPart/noCalendar/notJoined/tickedNothing member states. This is unusually deep behavioral disclosure for a read-only tool.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The core purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, but the remainder is a single dense block of run-on clauses with coined terms (tickedNothing, readInPart) that force re-reading. Nearly every sentence carries genuine semantics, so it is information-dense rather than padded, but the structure is poor and the length approaches the limit of usability.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the return-value burden itself and does so thoroughly, naming every status bucket (busy, unknown, readInPart, noCalendar, notJoined, tickedNothing), the per-stretch members list, and the unusual marker. For an algorithmically complex tool this leaves little an agent needs to know unstated.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema: timeZone falls back to the stored zone, limit keeps the earliest stretches, hours/weekdays restrict what the search considers, and the window is capped at its first 365 days. These are semantics the schema text alone does not convey.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: "Find when everyone in one of the person's circles is free," which clearly separates it from the sibling free_times_find (single-person) and from circles_list. It never names those siblings explicitly, so the differentiation is inferable rather than stated.

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?

Usage is implied by the scope (mutual availability inside a circle), and the closing line "circles_list names each circle's id" usefully points at the prerequisite for the circle parameter. There is no explicit when-to-use-this-vs-free_times_find guidance and no exclusions or failure conditions.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources