OrgLines

Create event

create_event

Add a calendar event to the caller's active workspace: 'title', 'start_at' (ISO-8601 datetime, or a date for an all-day event); optional 'end_at', 'event_type', 'availability', 'location', 'notes', a 'recurrence' with 'until' or 'count'. CONFIRMATION: this tool runs immediately when the caller asks for it — it writes only their own record, and they can undo it from this same surface, so the request is taken as the instruction. You get an ordinary result, not a plan_token. Everything destructive, outbound or financial still proposes and waits.

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": {
      "title": "<title>",
      "start_at": "<start_at>"
    },
    "name": "create_event"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`count`	No	How many occurrences, instead of 'until'.
`notes`	No
`title`	Yes
`until`	No	Last date of the series (inclusive). Required with 'recurrence' unless 'count' is given: a series with no end is refused.
`end_at`	No
`all_day`	No
`location`	No
`start_at`	Yes
`event_type`	No	One of exactly these. Map a synonym onto the closest one rather than inventing a value — anything else is rejected and the event is NOT created: a phone/video call → 'call'; an appointment, interview or visit → 'meeting'; a flight, hotel or restaurant reservation → 'booking'; a journey → 'trip'; anything else → 'event'.
`recurrence`	No
`availability`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false; the description adds what an agent actually needs: the write is confined to the caller's own record, it is undoable from the same surface, and it returns an ordinary result rather than a plan_token. That is genuine protocol context that resolves a real ambiguity about whether this call needs a confirmation handshake.

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?

Front-loaded with the verb and required parameters, then the confirmation policy, which is the highest-stakes information for an agent. The parameter rundown is a slightly list-like dump, but no sentence is filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For an 11-parameter tool with a nested recurrence object and no output schema, the description covers the create decision well but not the full input surface — the all_day boolean and the availability enum are never explained, and timezone handling for ISO dates is unaddressed. Adequate to call correctly in the common case, incomplete for edge cases.

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 coverage is only 27%, and the description does compensate for the most confusing inputs: start_at accepts an ISO-8601 datetime or a bare date for all-day events, and recurrence must terminate via 'until' or 'count'. However, it leaves 'all_day', 'availability', 'notes', 'end_at' and the nested recurrence fields (time, day_of_month, days_of_week) entirely to an under-documented schema.

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 and resource ('Add a calendar event') and narrows scope to 'the caller's active workspace', which is enough to separate it from get_event, update_event and delete_event. It does not address the plural sibling create_events, so an agent cannot tell from this text alone whether a multi-event request belongs here.

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?

Gives clear when-to-use guidance in the form of an execution policy: act immediately when the caller asks, and contrast with 'everything destructive, outbound or financial' which must propose and wait. No explicit when-not cases or named alternatives are given, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All OrgLines 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?