Skip to main content
Glama

Get free/busy

get_connection_freebusy
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the free/busy blocks of a connected calendar in a date range.

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>",
      "from": "<from>",
      "to": "<to>"
    },
    "name": "get_connection_freebusy"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesEnd, ISO 8601 date or datetime.
fromYesStart, ISO 8601 date or datetime.
timeZoneNo
connectionIdYesConnection id from list_calendar_connections.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare this as a safe, read-only, idempotent operation, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds the useful scope of returning free/busy blocks for a connected calendar in a date range, but it does not explain timezone behavior, output shape, or any permission/auth constraints.

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?

The description is a single efficient sentence with the key resource and scope front-loaded. There is no redundant or filler text.

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 a simple read-only tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose adequately. However, the lack of differentiation from similar free/busy and availability siblings and the undocumented timeZone parameter leave important context gaps.

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 75%, with from, to, and connectionId documented in the schema. The description only reinforces the date-range aspect and adds no further meaning beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline when schema coverage is high.

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 states the verb and resource: get free/busy blocks for a connected calendar within a date range. It is understandable on its own, but it does not distinguish this tool from closely related siblings such as get_busy_times, get_calendar_freebusy, or get_user_availability.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any stated prerequisites beyond the implied connection requirement. Given the number of similar availability/free-busy tools in the sibling list, the absence of routing guidance is a meaningful gap.

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