Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

DataToRAG

by com.datatorag
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

gws-mcp__calendar_respond_to_event

Destructive

Answers an invitation on the connected account's calendar: accepted, declined or tentative, with an optional note to the organizer. Takes the event ID and the response. The account has to be on the event's guest list; an event it is not invited to is refused with a message saying so. Returns the event ID, its title, the response now recorded and the note. With send_updates left at its default the organizer is told, as when a person answers in Google Calendar.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "event_id": "<event_id>",
      "response": "<response>"
    },
    "name": "gws-mcp__calendar_respond_to_event"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNoOptional email address of the connected account to use (e.g. 'user@gmail.com'). If omitted, the default account is used.
commentNoAn optional note to the organizer, shown beside the answer.
event_idYesThe ID of the event to answer, as calendar_list_events and calendar_get_event return it.
responseYesThe answer to record: accepted, declined or tentative.
calendar_idNoCalendar ID (default: "primary")
send_updatesNoWho to send response notifications to (default: "all")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark this as a non-read-only, destructive-hinted write, and the description adds value beyond them: the guest-list precondition, the refusal behavior, the organizer notification driven by send_updates, and the documented return payload. It does not say what happens to a previously recorded response (overwrite semantics) or how the response interacts with calendar_id, which keeps it short of a 5.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Five short sentences, front-loaded with the action and then the precondition, return shape, and notification side effect. Every sentence carries distinct information, though the closing analogy about answering in Google Calendar is slightly redundant with the send_updates explanation that precedes it.

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?

For a six-parameter, no-output-schema mutation tool, the description covers purpose, precondition, failure mode, notification side effect, and even the return values that the absent output schema would otherwise have to carry. Nothing an agent needs in order to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 still adds meaning: comment is framed as a note to the organizer shown beside the answer, and send_updates' default is explained in terms of real Google Calendar notification behavior. Only account and calendar_id are left purely to the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Answers an invitation on the connected account's calendar: accepted, declined or tentative'. That is unmistakably distinct from siblings like calendar_create_event, calendar_update_event or calendar_delete_event, so an agent can pick it without opening another schema.

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?

It gives a real precondition for use: the account has to be on the event's guest list, and off-list attempts are refused with an explanatory message. It stops short of naming alternatives (e.g. calendar_update_event if the agent needs to change other event fields rather than RSVP), so the routing guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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

All DataToRAG toolsInspect
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