Skip to main content
Glama

calendar_events

When recurring events fall, and whether they land on each other. query 'next' gives the first occurrence after the date in 'after' (or on it when inclusive is true). query 'occurrences' gives every occurrence between start and end inclusive, capped at limit and at most 1000; 'truncated' says whether the list was cut short, so never read a truncated list as complete. query 'collisions' gives the days between start and end where two or more of the given events fall together, each naming what shares it — the question a calendar of festivals is really asking, and one to ask here rather than reason out in prose. An event is either a name the calendar defines or an event given inline: {'name':..,'type':'fixed','month':..,'day':..}, {'name':..,'type':'nth_weekday','month':..,'weekday':..,'n':..} or {'name':..,'type':'interval','anchor':{..},'every':N,'unit':'days'|'years'}. Pass one as 'event', or many as 'events' — which 'collisions' requires and which answers the other two queries for every event in a single call. A year in which an event's date does not exist produces no occurrence: a leap-day feast happens in leap years and not otherwise, and is never moved to a nearby day.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endNo
afterNo
eventNo
limitNo
queryNonext
startNo
eventsNo
calendarYes
inclusiveNo

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden and does so richly: inclusive boundary behavior, the 1000-cap and 'truncated' warning, the requirement that collisions need multiple events, and the leap-day/nonexistent-date rule. These are non-obvious behaviors that an agent needs to know to interpret results correctly.

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 long but densely informative, with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, then organizes behavior by query, event specification, and edge cases, so every sentence earns its place.

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?

This is a complex 9-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, yet the description covers query semantics, boundary conditions, truncation, event formats, and missing-date behavior. It gives an agent enough to invoke the tool correctly and interpret the important parts of the response.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does. It explains the meaning of 'query', 'after', 'start', 'end', 'inclusive', 'limit', 'event', 'events', and the inline event structure, giving concrete shape examples. Only the 'calendar' parameter gets light treatment, but the description still notes that calendar-defined event names are resolved through it.

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 clearly states that the tool computes when recurring events fall and whether they collide, and then enumerates three specific query modes ('next', 'occurrences', 'collisions'). This is specific and immediately distinguishes calendar_events from sibling tools like calendar_periods or render_calendar_page, which serve different calendar-related purposes.

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?

The description gives explicit guidance on when to use each query and when to pass 'event' vs 'events', including the note that 'collisions' requires multiple events. It also tells users to prefer the tool over reasoning out collision answers in prose. It does not name sibling tools as alternatives, so it stops short of full when-not-to-use guidance.

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.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Each tool targets a distinct calendar operation, and the descriptions carefully draw boundaries between related concepts. There is modest overlap: convert_date also reports a named period, and calendar_events can answer nth-weekday questions that overlap with nth_weekday_of_month, so an agent might occasionally pick the wrong entry point.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are readable and consistently snake_case, but the set mixes verb-led names like convert_date and render_timeline with noun-led names like calendar_events and moon_phases, plus one prepositional verb in add_to_date. This is a readable mixture rather than a uniform verb_noun pattern.

Tool Count5/5

Fifteen tools sits at the upper end of the typical well-scoped range, but every tool fills a distinct role for an almanac-style server: date math, conversion, calendar queries, formatting, parsing, rendering, lunar and solar calculations, generation, and validation. The batched plural parameters also make the count feel intentional rather than bloated.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers the domain unusually well: conversion, arithmetic, events, periods, weekdays, format/parse, SVG rendering, moon phases, daylight, scattering, and validation all have dedicated tools. The main gap is introspection—there is no direct way to list a calendar spec's months, eras, week structure, periods, or formats beyond what other tools reveal through errors and outputs.

Resources