Skip to main content
Glama

nylas

by io.usefulapi

Create a calendar event

nylas_create_event
Destructive

Creates a calendar event (may send invites to participants). Requires calendar_id (sent as a query param). Nylas v3: POST /v3/grants/{grant_id}/events.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYesEvent title.
end_timeYesEvent end, Unix timestamp (seconds).
grant_idNoConnected-account grant id. Overrides NYLAS_GRANT_ID for this call.
locationNoEvent location.
start_timeYesEvent start, Unix timestamp (seconds).
calendar_idYesREQUIRED. The calendar id to create the event in (sent as a query param).
descriptionNoEvent description.
participantsNoParticipant email addresses (array of strings).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Adds behavioral info beyond annotations: 'may send invites to participants' and the HTTP method/endpoint. However, destructiveHint already signals mutation; description adds marginal context.

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, no fluff. First sentence conveys core action, second gives critical requirement and API reference. Very efficient.

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?

Tool has 8 parameters and no output schema. Description lacks return value information and more detailed side effects. Adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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% with descriptions for each parameter. The description reiterates 'calendar_id (sent as a query param)' but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states 'creates a calendar event' which is a specific verb+resource. Mentions side effect (may send invites). Does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like nylas_create_draft, but purpose is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it notes a requirement (calendar_id as query param), it does not provide context for selection among sibling tools.

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

All nylas toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: create vs list vs get for specific entities like draft, event, calendar, contact, grant, message, folder. There is no overlap, as even similar verbs like 'list' are paired with unique nouns. Agents can easily select the correct tool.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a uniform 'nylas_verb_noun' pattern using snake_case, with clear and predictable verbs (create, get, list, send) and nouns (draft, event, calendar, etc.). The naming is fully consistent across all 15 tools.

Tool Count5/5

With 15 tools, the set is well-scoped for a Nylas integration covering email, calendar, and contacts. Each tool serves a clear purpose without redundancy, and the count falls comfortably within the ideal range of 3-15 tools.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers reading and limited creation (drafts, events) but lacks update and delete operations for all entities, as well as create for contacts. This leaves notable gaps for full lifecycle management, though core workflows like listing and fetching are present.

Resources