Workspace369

Check team availability

calendar_check_availability

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check which team members are available on a date, from their working hours and that day's calendar events. The day is bounded in the workspace time zone (a member's own time zone override wins for that member) and the answer states the zone. date is required; employee_ids (from team_members_list) narrows the check. Returns available members (with working hours) and unavailable members (booked, with conflicts, or not a working day). For one person's weekly hours use team_member_availability_get; for events, calendar_list_events.

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": {
      "date": "<date>"
    },
    "name": "calendar_check_availability"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes	The day to check, ISO date (YYYY-MM-DD).
`employee_ids`	No	Team member ids (from team_members_list) to check; omit for everyone.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes
`available`	Yes
`time_zone`	Yes
`day_of_week`	Yes
`unavailable`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds genuinely non-obvious semantics beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: day boundaries are resolved in the workspace time zone with a per-member override winning for that member, and the response states the zone. It also discloses the available/unavailable split and the reasons for unavailability (booked, conflicts, non-working day). Return shape is partly covered by the output schema, so it stops 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

Four sentences, zero filler: capability first, then time-zone caveat, then parameter contract, then result shape, then sibling routing. Front-loaded and dense without being cryptic.

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?

Given a 2-parameter read-only tool with a full output schema, the description covers the remaining risk areas an agent would actually get wrong — time-zone resolution and the distinction from the two nearest siblings — leaving nothing material unexplained.

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 100% and the schema already documents both `date` (ISO YYYY-MM-DD) and `employee_ids` including 'omit for everyone'. The description restates the required/optional contract and the team_members_list provenance but adds no format or edge-case detail beyond the structured fields, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('check which team members are available on a date') and grounds it in two concrete data sources (working hours + that day's calendar events). It explicitly names the sibling tools it is not (team_member_availability_get, calendar_list_events), so an agent can route without opening schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Says `date` is required, that `employee_ids` narrows the check (and where to source them), and points to specific alternatives for the two adjacent needs (weekly hours, raw events). There is no ambiguity about when this tool versus a sibling is correct.

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

All Workspace369 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.