Skip to main content
Glama

Update event

addevent_update_event
DestructiveIdempotent

WRITE: changes fields of an existing event (only the fields you pass; the rest stay). The change goes live on its landing page and share links, and people who subscribed to the calendar or added the event with a live link are updated on their next calendar sync, so a time or location change can notify real people. No previous values are kept: read the event first. PATCH /events/{id}.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
colorNoColor 1-20 from the palette.
titleNoNew title (single line).
event_idYesEvent id (evt-...) to change.
locationNoAddress or URL (meeting link). Use either location or location_id, not both.
reminderNoMinutes before the start for a calendar-app reminder (0-10800).
timezoneNoIANA timezone for the start/end (default: the calendar's timezone), or 'floating'.
free_busyNoHow the event shows in an attendee's calendar.
calendar_idNoMove the event to this calendar id.
custom_dataNoArbitrary key-value pairs to store on the object (snake_case keys), e.g. an external id.
descriptionNoPlain text or simple HTML (keep under ~500 characters for cross-browser links).
location_idNoId of a saved location (0 = none). Not together with location.
datetime_endNoEnd date-time (default: start + 1 hour). Same formats as the start.
rsvp_enabledNoRequire an RSVP before the event can be added to a calendar.
rsvp_form_idNoRSVP form id or 'default' (see addevent_list_rsvp_forms).
all_day_eventNoAll-day event: only the dates are used.
internal_nameNoInternal name, never shown publicly.
datetime_startNoNew start: YYYY-MM-DD, YYYY-MM-DD hh:mm or YYYY-MM-DD hh:mm:ss.
organizer_nameNoOrganizer name (needs organizer_email).
recurring_ruleNoiCalendar recurrence rule such as FREQ=WEEKLY;COUNT=10. The start must match the rule. Omit for a one-off event; on update an empty string makes the event stop repeating.
organizer_emailNoOrganizer e-mail (needs organizer_name).
landing_page_template_idNoEvent landing page template id or 'default' (see addevent_list_event_templates).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, but the description adds the crucial consequence: changes go live on the landing page and share links, and subscribers are notified on next sync. It also warns that no previous values are kept, which is behavior beyond the annotation. It even describes the side effect of time/location changes notifying real people.

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?

The description is two dense sentences plus an endpoint tag. It is front-loaded with the operation type (WRITE) and partial-update rule, then consequences, then the read-first prerequisite. Slightly long but every clause is informative.

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?

For a destructive, open-world update tool with no output schema, it covers the critical behavioral aspects: partial update, live effect on shared links and subscribers, irreversibility requiring prior read, and the endpoint. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to call it correctly.

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%, so the schema already documents all 21 parameters in detail. The description only adds the partial-update semantics and the PATCH endpoint, but does not provide additional parameter-level guidance. A baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the full parameter documentation.

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 states a specific verb+resource: 'changes fields of an existing event', and immediately specifies partial-update semantics ('only the fields you pass; the rest stay'). It maps to PATCH /events/{id}. It is easily distinguished from the sibling create_event and update_calendar.

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?

It gives a clear operational instruction: 'No previous values are kept: read the event first.' This tells the agent to call get_event before updating to avoid data loss. However, it does not name the get_event sibling explicitly or discuss alternatives like re-creating an event.

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.