Skip to main content
Glama

delete_event

Destructive

Delete a Microsoft calendar event after human approval: request a preview first, then confirm with the returned request ID. Organized events are cancelled for attendees.

Instructions

Delete a calendar event on the active Microsoft account. TWO-PHASE, HUMAN-APPROVED: the first call (no request_id) executes nothing — it returns status=approval_required with a preview of exactly what would happen and a request_id. A human approves out of band (GigaMail console, CLI or Telegram, behind Windows Hello / Touch ID); the second call with that request_id executes the payload that was approved (the approved arguments, not the ones passed the second time). Requests expire (default 15 min); identical pending requests are deduplicated; more than 20 requests/hour per tool are refused (status=rate_limited). Every phase is written to the audit log. Deleting an event the user organised cancels it for every attendee (the provider sends cancellations). The preview shows the event_id. Returns {success}. Requires a Microsoft account.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
event_idYesEvent id from list_events.
request_idNoOmit on the first call. On the first call the tool does NOT execute: it returns status=approval_required, a preview and a request_id. A human must approve that request_id out of band (GigaMail console, `gigamail approvals approve`, or Telegram — all behind Windows Hello / Touch ID). Then call again with the same request_id to execute. The agent cannot approve; repeating the call without approval just returns awaiting_approval.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / event_id / description
      Added value: +"Event id from list_events."
    • addedInput schema / properties / request_id / description
      Added value: +"Omit on the first call. On the first call the tool does NOT execute: it returns status=approval_required, a preview and a request_id. A human must approve that request_id out of band (GigaMail console, `gigamail approvals approve`, or Telegram — all behind Windows Hello / Touch ID). Then call again with the same request_id to execute. The agent cannot approve; repeating the call without approval just returns awaiting_approval."
  2. First observedv0.1.3

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes far beyond the annotations by disclosing the two-phase approval mechanism, the need for human out-of-band approval, the rate limit (20 requests/hour), request expiry, deduplication, audit logging, and the cancellation behavior for attendees. It also clarifies that the second call uses the approved arguments, not the ones passed. This is rich behavioral disclosure with no contradictions.

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 appropriately detailed for a complex two-phase approval tool. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and then systematically covers the approval flow, limits, and behaviors. Every sentence contributes meaningful information without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured.

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 the tool's complexity, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, two-phase approval, human requirements, rate limits, deduplication, expiry, audit, cancellation impact, return value, and account prerequisite. There is no output schema, but the description states it returns {success}. Nothing an agent needs to correctly invoke this tool is missing.

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?

The input schema already provides comprehensive descriptions for both parameters (event_id and request_id), including the two-phase flow. The description adds some nuance (e.g., 'the approved arguments, not the ones passed the second time') but largely reiterates the schema. With 100% schema coverage, the description adds little beyond the baseline.

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 (delete), a clear resource (calendar event), and a scoping context (active Microsoft account). It also details the two-phase approval flow, which distinguishes this tool from any sibling deletion tools. The purpose is unambiguous and immediately actionable.

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 clear context on when to use the tool (deleting calendar events) and includes important operational constraints like the two-phase approval requirement, rate limits, and deduplication. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., delete_message or delete_folder), leaving the agent to infer that it is only for events. This is a minor gap, hence 4 rather than 5.

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

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/adecubed/gigamail'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server