Caly

Delete calendar event

delete_connection_event

Destructive

Delete an event from a connected calendar. Two steps: the first call returns CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED with a confirmToken; tell the user what will happen, then call again with the SAME arguments plus confirmToken.

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": {
      "connectionId": "<connectionId>",
      "eventId": "<eventId>"
    },
    "name": "delete_connection_event"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`eventId`	Yes	Event id from list_connection_events.
`calendarId`	No	Which calendar of the connection; defaults to the primary one.
`confirmToken`	No	Leave empty on the first call. Then pass the token from the CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED answer.
`connectionId`	Yes	Connection id from list_calendar_connections.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, but they cannot express the CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED handshake. The description discloses that protocol clearly, which is the single most important behavioral fact for calling this tool. It stops short of saying what the deletion actually affects (attendee notifications, recurring instances, reversibility).

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?

Two sentences, zero waste, with the destructive action and the required confirmation step front-loaded before any detail. Nothing could be removed without losing critical meaning.

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?

For a destructive, non-idempotent, open-world delete with no output schema, the description supplies the missing piece an agent most needs: the confirmation handshake and the instruction to inform the user. It is only slightly short on consequences of deletion and failure modes.

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% and the schema already spells out confirmToken's two-phase usage and the origin of eventId and connectionId. The description restates the confirmToken rule ("same arguments plus confirmToken") without adding format or constraint detail, so the schema carries the load and baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: "Delete an event from a connected calendar." An agent can tell this is the connection-scoped delete rather than a generic one, though the presence of a sibling delete_calendar_event means the distinction between 'connected calendar' events and 'calendar' events is left implicit.

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?

The description gives procedural usage of the two-step flow (tell the user what will happen, then retry with the same arguments plus confirmToken), which is genuinely useful. However it never states when to pick this over the near-identical delete_calendar_event sibling, nor any prerequisites such as scope or permission needs.

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

All Caly 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?