Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Infomaniak Calendar MCP Server

Infomaniak Calendar MCP Server

Official
by Infomaniak
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

calendar_get_event

Retrieve a single Infomaniak calendar event by its ID to view details such as time, title, and attendees.

Instructions

Get a single Infomaniak calendar event by ID

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": {
      "event_id": "<event_id>"
    },
    "name": "calendar_get_event"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
event_idYesThe ID of the event to retrieve

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.3.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not say whether this is read-only (inferable from 'Get' but unstated), what happens for an invalid/unknown ID, whether permissions or a calendar context are needed, or what the response contains. For a simple lookup tool this is a notable but not fatal gap.

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?

One short sentence with the key qualifier ('single', 'by ID') front-loaded and no filler. Size is appropriate for a one-parameter lookup, though the brevity leaves nothing to build on.

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 single-resource read with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It still omits return shape expectations and not-found behavior, which an agent would need to handle errors or chain calls 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 coverage is 100% and the single event_id parameter is already documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no format, sourcing, or ID-discovery guidance beyond restating that lookup is by ID.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('a single Infomaniak calendar event') plus the lookup key ('by ID'), which clearly separates it from list/create/update/delete siblings by name and intent. It does not explicitly name a sibling as an alternative, but the 'single ... by ID' framing makes the distinction obvious.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: 'by ID' suggests using this when a specific event ID is known rather than browsing, but the description never states when to prefer calendar_list_events or what to do if the ID is unknown. No prerequisites, no exclusions.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools